Originally Posted by Atomicman
Of course, this is your choice although not a very responsible one. And as long as you are willing to assume that risk and pick up the tab yourself if something critical does happen. That's fine. But if you become a burden on the system, and don't pay your bills if you icncur them, I see this as a problem.
It is no different then the guy who drives with no car insurance, but keeps his golf club membership when he loses his job. Sounds like a pretty ridiculous choice doesn't it!
I think the question at hand is as follows:
Should healthcare be a universal service similar to the Fire Department. In other words no matter who's house burns they show up & put the fire out!
Pay for food, buy insurance.
Pay mortgage, buy insurance.
When you are a group of one---or even a family of 4 with out the actuarial benefits of a large group (consisting of hopefully exclusively healthy younger non-childbearing folks) --- health insurance is unfortunatly a luxury that many who are unemployed simply cannot afford.
Lets see, premium in a non-group setting for a family of 4 as much as $1,200 per month, mortgage $750---
I really don't have a clue where the $150 per month figures come from---no premiums for decent coverage have been that low around here in at least a decade.
which would you choose given that choice?