Car insurance is mandatory, should "people" insurance be the same?
I'm renewing my car insurance, and the idea struck me, how can car insurance be mandatory, yet millions of people have to go without medical care because they are not insured? This seems to me a hypocrisy, and is a sign that capitalism has gone completely out of control when a pile of steal is worth more than a person.
(the pic is my torn Petellar Tendon, and no, I don't have insurance, self-employed 
)
Of course!
Side Score: 10
|
 |
Cars cost $, people are free
Side Score: 13
|
|
|
|
|
Through history, as people have become brighter, and our standard of living has increased, certain things that were once considered a luxury, became the norm. drinking water, sewage, education. These were all once things that people had to get for themselves, now they are provided, and society is a better place for it. I think it should be the same for healthcare. Side: Of course!
1
point
|
4
points
The reason car insurance is mandatory is because if you destroy my property or hurt me or my family with your car, you've got to pay me. If you destroy yourself, you don't need insurance because you don't have to pay anyone. If health insurance was mandatory and insurance companies had to make insurance affordable even for people who can't afford it, then insurance companies will pass the cost on to those who can afford it. The reason we are in an economic mess is because the government told the lending companies that they had to lend money to people who couldn't afford it. Government should mind its own business like protecting our borders, not telling businesses how to run their business. Side: Cars cost $, people are free
The reason we are in an economic mess is because the government told the lending companies that they had to lend money to people who couldn't afford it. You have it backwards, lack of oversite got us into the morgage crises. No one was holding a gun to lending agencies heads, making them make bad loans. By the same token, no one was holding a gun to anyone's head to take out a bad loan. But you must have been living in another country if you don't think lending agencies were pulling every trick in the book to get anyone they could to sign on the dotted line. I couldn't check my mail for awhile without getting 5 or 6 completely retarded loan offers. I know a guy stuck with three homes worth over 250k each on a 60k salary. The bank had him convinced he was going to be a realestate giant in 5 years. It was a way for lenders to make a quick buck. And they knew they would never be held responsible when the bubble burst, because there is no oversite, and no responsibity in the corporate world today. "It wasn't me, the corporation made me do it." And so we sign a check, for a sum that would easily cover universal healthcare, to bail them out. But that's okay! Because at least it's not government right joe? Well to the point. It's not a perfect analogy. But according to every source not funded by private insurance corporations, universal healthcare equals less cost to the American people in the long run because of prevention and a shift from profit driven healthcare to healthcare driven healthcare, longer happier lives, and doctors who are free to do their job without spending half their time and income dealing with insurance companies. You're right though, you just can't trust government with anything, privatization is definitely the way to go. (police, firemen, military, infrastructure, social security, emergency services) yeah... Side: Of course!
Life insurance is what you are referring to I am assuming? Some people do not want life insurance because they do not think that it will ever pay off whereas some people feel the need to have some money available to their family if anything should happen to them. It is all about personal opinion at that point, but when you step behind the wheel of a car you are putting other people's lives as well as yours into your own hands so for that reason you must have some source of money to give should you take a life while on the road or inconvinience one by smashing their automobile. Side: Cars cost $, people are free
I was talking about health insurance. If you get in a wreck, your car is usually fixed, not given a funeral. Sometimes it is given a funeral, and even more rare, insurance kicks in for a new car. The point is, you're not allowed to drive a car without some kind of social program to pay for it or others cars and lives, if something were to happen. So then, why is this mandatory, and not health insurance? Why is universal healthcare an "evil social program," but not car insurance? What's the difference? I smell corporate driven hypocrisy. A human can get into a wreck just as easily as a car. Plus a human has feelings and families and dependants and all kinds of other stuff a car doesn't have. Not that I'm against cars having families and dependants, but at least they know their kids would be insured... Side: Of course!
mainly to avoid liability. people don't have to drive, and the government is making sure that those who decide to put other people's investments in danger better have a way of making the person not at fault have costs. health insurance covers you... big difference. Side: Cars cost $, people are free
Ah. That makes more sense, and your argument is quite valid in my opinion. And I agree, it should be manditory for people to have health insurance. That way tax payers won't have to pay for those too cheap to have it to get medical help. (like those on welfare) Side: Of course!
The major difference is that you have a choice whether or not to buy a car, and you're required to be able to cover the damage to other people's property rather than your own. When people buy cars, insurance is known to be mandatory and the insurance costs become part of the budget. Also, the bare minimum (in the UK at least) for car insurance is that you have enough coverage to pay for the damage to the other person's car, not your own. This seems fare enough, and is obviously not required when insuring yourself. You're insured against liability and damage to other peoples' property, not your own (ie. your own body). That being said, I am a supporter of social health systems such as the UK's National Health Service. I just think the comparison drawn here between car and health insurance isn't a valid one. Side: completely different
1
point
Any idiot can have a kid. Cars require an investment of time and money, and that investment should be protected from dumb drivers. There's too many people anyway. If some die off, well that's evolution, survival of the fitest, I'll send your mom a wreath or something dead guy. Side: Cars cost $, people are free
|
