but incentive buy insuance clearly there. why pay $2k for nothing rather than buy insurance? even after $2k, there going be medical bills, especially if children.
some not buy insurance, to be sure. but many will, and that whole idea.
Perhaps. We'll have to see how this goes. A lot of folks who won't buy insurance were getting pretty big checks for refundable tax credits, anyway. The two will probably offset.
The main problem I have is that for most people, they COULD buy insurance today, but don't because it's too expensive. Yes, this will make things much less expensive for high-risk folks, but will make things much more expensive for healthy folks. I was without insurance for a few years in my 20s. The cost of it far outweighed the potential downside. Lots of people make that calculation. Some percent of them gamble and lose.
Trouble is, now, everybody is compelled to buy the insurance or pay the fine. If we couldn't afford it before, and it'll actually get MORE expensive if you're healthy, this is a huge step backwards for a lot of folks.
It's not that I don't support health reform. I think it's one of the most important things in the country right now. However, we have to address cost and Obamacare really doesn't do that in any meaningful way. It just tries to share the costs across a broader pool. But let's face it, the folks with money pretty much already had health insurance. The uninsured either won't have to pay for their insurance, or can't afford it.
Until we have single payer and are not paying 100% more for the same drugs that England buys, we won't have a solution to this problem. I think everybody realizes that. Where I differ is that I am not entirely sure this is a meaningful first step.
oh, julie totally down for single payer. no argument there.