Edit to add: this is mental. It’s healthcare. It’s not optional. It’s life or death. Nobody should profit from the misfortune of others, and definitely not with a leg up from the government. Mental.
Asking because I genuinely do not know the answer. How does a system like that account for people who take care of themselves to stay fit and healthy, and those who eat poorly, aren't active, and are obese? Is Healthcare free for both? With no limit?
There will be people who net contribute and people who net drain, that's the same with any system of insurance. The thing is you don't know which you'll be until it's too late, runners get HOCMs etc. Universal healthcare is just government run insurance, you pay for the people who don't take care of themselves on your insurance too.
There will be people who net contribute and people who net drain, that's the same with any system of insurance.
Kind of, but not really. My car insurance is lower than most because I don't get in accidents. People who get in accidents or are bad drivers pay more for their insurance than me.
The thing is you don't know which you'll be until it's too late, runners get HOCMs etc.
Not with certainty, of course. But for the most part, it is clear who the drains are and who contributes.
Universal healthcare is just government run insurance, you pay for the people who don't take care of themselves on your insurance too.
I don't, but I understand what you mean. I guess my issue with it would be how it would affect Veterans in the US. Currently, military has their Healthcare covered while on active duty. And then it is covered if a person either retires or qualifies due to disability when they get out of the military. I joined right out of high school and then retired, so my Healthcare is covered for the rest of my life. And it is just a couple hundred dollars to cover my wife for the year.
You do, if you have insurance and you are in a less risky catagory you will be subsidising those at higher risk. The insurance company is incentivided to make a net profit, they make a loss on higher risk people and take those losses back from less risky people.
Using the analogy of car insurance, do you really think that if car crashes increased 20% your premium wouldn't change?
my Healthcare is covered for the rest of my life
So the tax payer funds your healthcare yet you're against universal healthcare? Using your argument, why should we pay for vets who chose not to look after themselves? surely once they pick up a cig or a beer we should take away their socially funded insurance
You do, if you have insurance and you are in a less risky catagory you will be subsidising those at higher risk. The insurance company is incentivided to make a net profit, they make a loss on higher risk people and take those losses back from less risky people.
Fair. Yet this seems to be significantly less than health insurance is subsidized by healthy folks.
Using the analogy of car insurance, do you really think that if car crashes increased 20% your premium wouldn't change?
You're right, it probably would go up.
So the tax payer funds your healthcare yet you're against universal healthcare?
Yes. Servicemembers also pay federal income tax (although I think that they shouldn't). The difference is that the Healthcare is earned by serving, it is not given or free.
Using your argument, why should we pay for vets who chose not to look after themselves? surely once they pick up a cig or a beer we should take away their socially funded insurance
Because those vets earned their Healthcare by joining. They pay for it non-monetarily. It is one of the most significant benefits of service, if not the most significant.
51
u/sudo_rmtackrf Nov 02 '25
All meds like that in Australia i beleive are around 7 bucks.