An argument for the individual mandate is that it would greatly spread the financial risk.
If nearly everyone is required to purchase health insurance, then there is more of the premiums paid into the system to pay for sick healthcare services.
Many argue that people who currently lack health insurance are young and relatively healthy. Because these people will not need many health care services, their premiums will in effect subsidize the cost of caring for others.
These additional premiums will facilitate the financial risk for everybody: health, patients and insurance companies.
Without a mandate, there is no incentive for healthy people to buy coverage. In fact, a developer of office might argue that this lack of incentives actually increases the cost of health care and health insurance rates if healthy people wait to buy insurance until they get sick.
Perhaps the most powerful moral argument is that the mandate will, in theory, improve the average health of Americans. There have been some pretty disseminated studies over the past two years linking lack of health insurance for illness, chronic illness, bankruptcy and even death.
The simple health insurance means that it is easier to stay healthy and away from the emergency room.
There are advantages and disadvantages to being all - especially in public policy. And we know that we do not cover everything. So let us know what you think.
0 Komentar