An individual mandate is necessary

[MattNC]

if you're going to require that insurance companies not deny people for pre-existing conditions. Otherwise, why would anyone buy insurance in the first place? They could just buy and drop it anytime they get sick. That would obviously create an unsustainable model for insurance companies and their enrollees.

Yes, I think a "robust" public option should be included in HCR if you're going to require a mandate so that there's a more affordable option, but getting coverage for people with pre-existing conditions is just as important, if not more so. That, I don't think, is possible without the mandate.

I tried making this point in a couple other threads, but it got lost in the fold quickly, and I think it's an important one that bears repeating.

[ZombieHorde]

1. Do you know how much money people will have to pay?

Do you have any actually numbers? This is difficult to argue with the facts.

[MattNC]

2. No I don't

it varies of course depending on one's financial and employment situation. I could be wrong, but I think read that the House bill will limit some (maybe all?) individual to only paying 5% of their income? Someone probably knows the answer to that I'm sure.

[ixion]

3. what, your daddy own an insurance company?

:eyes:

[ipaint]

4. No they aren't.

Insurance companies did just fine before they got the nasty idea to fuck over customers by denying care.

They used to provide a decent service at a reasonable rate without a mandate and people didn't game the system en masse.
The insurance companies decided to game the system.


A tax mandate for medicare for all, yes. A mandate to feed the coffers of an unelected body of greedy disaster capitalists who are responsible for sinking the system and killing a million americans in the last 20 years, I don't think so.

And anyone who does, well... all I can say is your well trained.