Other countries have systems in place to deal with this situation.

I would like to state as clearly as I can that no return on this investment that can be secured only with coercion of currently free Americans is justifiable. You are far too willing to impose costs on some and to thereby limit their freedom in order to benefit others regardless of need and desert. One of the major costs is loss of freedom by those who do not choose to purchase insurance so that they can pursue their own life plans, which at the moment do not not include paying for health care. The other is a serious loss of the possibility of innovation in the economy. One wonders how many major productive projects, think Microsoft, Google, etc. will have to be postponed because young innovators have to spend money on health insurance that they would not otherwise have to spend. This diversion of resources could have serious negative consequences and at the same time reduce the scope of freedom which in and of itself is a serious loss to society. We need to find non-coercive ways of accomplishing the same goal, if indeed we should be pursuing the goals of universal coverage which will almost certainly make health care more expense for everyone with too much money seeking scarce goods.

If only the nation as one could simply make you Healthcare King for a day, I have no doubt you would set us on a course that would do the country proud.

Thanks!

You can’t force insurers not to rate people (the pre-existing conditions bugaboo everyone hates) if there is no mandate to buy insurance. Otherwise, you can wait till you feel the crippling chest pains before

1) chewing an aspirin
2) calling an ambulance
3) logging online and getting insurance

This is not a simple matter to overcome, and it’s just one of the many matters in our system that are incredibly complex, morally, financially, ethically, and philosophically.

Is life sacred? Some say yes, that it should be preserved via the best technology as long as humanly possible. Others say no, let people die with dignity.

Are people free to make their own decisions in life? Some say yes, don’t make me wear a helmet when I ride my chopper, don’t try to regulate my drug use, etc. Others say, fine, but if you get in an accident or develop cancer, don’t expect my tax dollars to pay for your treatment at the ER.

But what about the kids of such rugged individualists? Is it fair for a baby to be born in our country and left to fend on its own because the parents don’t want to buy health insurance?

None of these things are easy.

If you listen to those who say that some ideology has simple cures (the market will right all things; Jesus will provide; etc.), you are listening with the wrong lobe of your brain–the reptilian part where greed and hope and fear are untroubled by rationality.

A 90 year old dying of cancer who develops a heart arrhythmia cannot, by law, be turned down for an implantable pacemaker and defibrillator, and Medicare must pay for it.

Most people say they do not want their deaths prolonged by technology, and would much rather die at home or under hospice care. But the system is set up to funnel them into the ICU’s, where hospitals, specialists, equipment makers, pharmaceutical interests, etc. make a fortune on the end game.

Then the Republican Party suggests that any attempt to be rational about this is “pulling the plug” on grandma, regardless of what grandma wants.

Pulling the plug is one thing. Inserting dozens of plugs in every orifice of grandma’s body and exposed vein is yet another.

Hospitals will fight tooth and nail to keep their beds filled and their test apparatus running and their doctors operating.

So much for death with dignity. We are all moving to an end game where we become peri-corpses from which money (our own and the tax payers) is siphoned out by an efficient and ruthless corporate suction system.

Yes, reform is necessary but…

Then put any kind of reasonable excuse for delaying it right here.

Examples:

* but jobs are right now a higher priority
* [when and if employment returns to more historic norms] but people have good jobs now and can finally afford healthcare, so why rock the boat?
* but cutting taxes is a higher priority
* but the national security must come first
* etc.

Can you describe ANY scenario where healthcare would EVER be something you’d think needs to be fixed NOW?

“I believe expanding access to health insurance is critically important.”

and this:

“Health care costs are crippling businesses, bankrupting families and state governments, enabling fraud and abuse, increasing taxes, and failing to deliver on many of its promises.”

when the costs of health care are directly related to what we refer to as “Health Insurance.” Traditionally and by definition, insurance is a risk-management tool. What we refer to as “Health insurance” is not insurance at all. It is a health-care payment plan.

Should the Federal government require Auto-insurance to cover oil changes?

The costs of health CARE need to reflect the prices at which a willing buyer and willing seller decide to transact business (free-markets) before any meaningful reform can be effected.

@mikeoli: If the state of Utah has dumped the plan, why don’t you suggest it to another state. Find a way to make it work. I really do believe that we can make healthcare much more afforable by cutting the costs, and cost can only be cut if such systems are developed and adopted.