Why should insured cover the uninsured?
Many states require a driver/vehicle owner to have "car" insurance in order to be granted or to renew a license. So why the outcry from some against the "individual mandate" under "Obamacare."
Why should those who are insured be forced to pay for accident or medical expenses of the uninsured through higher premiums charged by insurance companies, which merely reflect the higher charges that providers pass-through to everyone in order to recover the little or nothing that they receive from the non-insureds?
And what stupid "Obamacare" actuaries would assess so much less of a penalty tax than a (presumably healthy) noninsured would otherwise have to pay in premium for his/her own health insurance policy?
"Let's see now, should I pay a penalty tax of $300 or a (perhaps even subsidized) premium of $2400." Dah!
No wonder Obama's Affordable Care Act is imploding with never "affordable" premiums skyrocketing and insurance companies exiting the marketplace. You can't expect them to cover the pre-existing conditions of bad risks at any "affordable" premium without the proper balance of more good risks; and they can't get those without the individual mandate and without a penalty tax greater than the premium would otherwise be for a person choosing to be uninsured.
Anyone, except the "Obamacare" actuaries, knows that the "pain" must be much more than the "pleasure" of undesirable behavior in order for that undesirable pleasure to cease.
Kenneth L. Anderson
St. Charles