Why "mandatory" matters...

Listen, as someone who chooses when self-employed not to carry health insurance, and as someone who has been covered by employers yet never made a single claim and has been somewhat resentful toward paying premiums for everybody and their family who seems to run to the doctor every time they sneeze or get a minor cut or something*...

I can totally understand why people in good health, and with a bit of savings under their belt, might choose to keep that premium money in their pockets and invest it on preventative maintenance-like health services that are not covered under the insurance plan anyways (ie/good food, massage services, exercise programs, etc.) If/when you do need to visit the doctor, you just pay out of your pocket -- and it's at higher prices to say, set a broken leg, than the insured are billed. (The insurance plans have worked out a "quantity" discount on the base prices as they cover so many.)

It's a gamble one takes, sure, but often it pays off if indeed you are young and healthy, and watch yourself on icy sidewalks say, so you don't break a leg or something (aside: I'm always amazed at the dumbish things young people with insurance do, the risks they seem to take, perhaps because in the back of their minds they know it won't cost them anything aside from the physical toll should an "accident" occur. Kind of like those who pop a cholesterol pill, yet keep on eating poorly because they think they are "covered".)

But if the country is going to support "mandatory" insurance, I totally understand the reason that you can't let some go without. Because then, you won't really solve the problems the "mandatory" is supposed to cure. That is, you'll still have free-riders -- the poor people who will show up at emergency rooms with their complaints knowing they will not be turned away. Without insurance and no way of collecting the bills over time from those without savings, jobs, or tangible property (or permanent addresses even), you really won't have solved the problem that the "mandatory" is aimed at fixing. What you'll really do is just enlarge the pool of the rest of us who will be subsidizing the emergency care of those people, because most will be forced to carry insurance under the "mandatory" plan.

That's why Hillary's healthcare plan makes more sense than Barack Obama's. Either it's "universal" -- mandatory for all to be insured, or why bother tinkering with the current system?
----------------------

*Once, I did have to visit a primary care physician when I somehow had a bug that I couldn't shake, even with time, rest and nutrition. So you pay out of pocket for the visit from savings, and for the antibiotic prescription. Still, if you keep yourself healthy overall and have a good family medical history when you're young, you can still come out ahead if you bank the premiums you've saved for such situations. And yes, I can hear some of you say: What about "accidents"?? Truth is, many of those can be controlled too if you're reasonably risk averse. And the worst most young people face -- car accidents -- can also be covered if you choose car insurance with higher PIP coverages and higher deductibles. Just like in my state, farmers and those with significant assets are not required to carry anything but liability insurance on their vehicles to be driven on the roads, so too can one choose to structure your finances in such a way that health "insurance" might not be needed, depending on one's lifestyle.

But as you age, and find yourself in clustered in communities with more chances of picking up bugs, health insurance can be a good thing. I'm just saying, there probably are a lot of people in their late teens, and early to late 20s who are uninsured by choice -- and not freeloading off the system either -- when they are no longer covered under a family plan. But the only way I can see for the mandatory health insurance for all to work is if, indeed, you "force" the poorest amongst us to pay their way as well. Otherwise, what problem is really solved?