American Health Care

[Revisedsoul]

something needs to be done

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=463499

even though im in canada, and it doesnt affect me. its applauling

 

[Venmoch]

Whoa, makes me rather thankful of my slightly frayed at the edges National Health Service......

Or that film John Q. That was a good film....

 

[Raziaar]

I agree. Our medical bills and stuff can be so ****ing expensive for the smallest things, much less life threatening injuries or illnesses that need to be treated.

I went in for an ear infection a year ago or so, and was billed, TWICE mind you, for a grand total of about 800 dollars. The doctor urged me to come in, so they could remove the ear piece thing, and check on it, and they ****ing took the initiative to charge me a second time for coming in like that, for a couple hundred bucks to remove a god damn ear splint or whatever it was called.

Disgusting. After that experience, I hate our medical system.



EDIT: Granted, it was on a weekend night, in the emergency room(because my ear had gotten so bad, I needed medical attention. Normal ear medicine wasn't working, needed antibiotics, and couldn't bear to wait until the weekday). However, the hospital was almost devoid of patients, yet I still got stuck with such a huge bill for such a small problem. Why? Simply because they can. Awful.

 

[el Chi]

Whoa, makes me rather thankful of my slightly frayed at the edges National Health Service......

I love the NHS and will defend it against almost all poignards until my final breath escapes me on a trolley in a hospital coridoor. Honestly - it's f*cking marvellous

I'm epileptic and, to help keep me conscious, I have to take 150mg Lamotrigine bi-daily, so 300mg a day, every day over a course of five years.
It cost $204 for 60 100mg tablets in the US on 21/11/2003; in Canada on 16/5/2004, it cost the equivalent of $160 US dollars for 100 tqablets of the same dosage. Link.
Right, here's the maths.

At the current exchange rate, it'd be roughly £84.73 for those 100 Canadian tablets and £108.03 for the American ones. Let's go with that number, seeing as it's the US we're interested in.

5 years = 1825 days. I take 300mg a day, so that's 547,500mg over the full course, about 5475 100mg tablets. 91.25 lots of 60... 60 times $204... So we're talking a grand total of $12240, or £6,484.70.

£6484.70 that would have to be paid by my parents, or by their insurance, etc. for something that none of us could help.
With the NHS, this inconveniences no-one. Least of all myself, and for that I'm eternally grateful.



Diclaimer: Feel free to check outthe maths - I'm pretty sure it's right, but it was never my strong suit.

 

[CptStern]

the insurance companies make too much money, so do the drug companies ..american universal healthcare (a la canada) wont happen anytime soon, especially since the people in power who can affect change are too busy being in bed with those same corporations. Canadian healthcare could follow suit if the greedy multi-nats have their way

edit: el Chi, pot can help epilepsy and it's far cheaper (not that you have to pay for it) ..but dont take my word for it, see a doctor. Kudos to you btw epilepsy is a difficult disorder to live with

 

[Razor]

I think Britain has the best of both worlds, free health care for the people who need it and, for the people who can afford it, private health care with no queues.

I think the Nhs though is far too broad when it comes to what treatments they offer on it, sex change operations should not be on the nhs, i do not pay taxes so Peter can become Patricia, no matter how much he moans.

 

[Maxi]

We have virtually healthcare for everyone, it's so cheap, even the bums can afford it, since they get money from teh state.

Finland r rock.

 

[el Chi]

edit: el Chi, pot can help epilepsy and it's far cheaper (not that you have to pay for it) ..but dont take my word for it, see a doctor. Kudos to you btw epilepsy is a difficult disorder to live with

Thank you Stern, that means a lot
As for pot - well, I really really don't get on well with it. It either makes me feel a bit shitty with few positive effects or I've freaked out pretty bad on it. Whether that's due to the imbalance of chemicals in my brain I couldn't say. I'd be interested to see how lamotrigine and epilepsy interact with other, less legal drugs. Not because taking drugs is cool, but because I'd like to be informed of any potential complications with my condition if I chose to.

I think the Nhs though is far too broad when it comes to what treatments they offer on it, sex change operations should not be on the nhs, i do not pay taxes so Peter can become Patricia, no matter how much he moans.

I don't know. I can understand why you might object to it, but trans-sexuals are deeply unhappy with their predicament (ie: their birth gender) and if Simon to Simone is the cure, then I'm not sure that it's so different to prescribing NHS-funded anti-depressents or psychological therapy to depressives.

 

[CptStern]

Thank you Stern, that means a lot
As for pot - well, I really really don't get on well with it. It either makes me feel a bit shitty with few positive effects or I've freaked out pretty bad on it. Whether that's due to the imbalance of chemicals in my brain I couldn't say. I'd be interested to see how lamotrigine and epilepsy interact with other, less legal drugs. Not because taking drugs is cool, but because I'd like to be informed of any potential complications with my condition if I chose to..

ya it's best to be absolutely sure before you take anything, including prescribed drugs. I just mentioned the pot thing cuz a friend of mine's cousin ( ) has epilepsy and she says it helps her with side effects of medication and seems to supress/delay her attacks. Good luck

 

[KoreBolteR]

thats very kind of you to mention that cpt.
..and good luck el chi

 

[el Chi]

ya it's best to be absolutely sure before you take anything, including prescribed drugs. I just mentioned the pot thing cuz a friend of mine's cousin ( ) has epilepsy and she says it helps her with side effects of medication and seems to supress/delay her attacks. Good luck

Well I haven't really had any side effects and I've been on them for over a year now, so with any luck... <Crosses fingers and touches wood>

And thank you again to both yourself and KoreBolteR - encouragement is very kind.

 

[Venmoch]

Well after just having a totally free health checkup and eye examination (To see if I had any pressure on the eye) I am now glad for the NHS.

Seriously, you guys rule!

Also, dilated pupils do not rule. They make me look scary I have about 1mm of Iris at the moment. I look like I'm possessed or something.

 

[CptStern]

or on drugs

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Along with the price of healthcare comes some of the best treatment, however.

I'm also not going to pay for someone else's illness who I don't even know. Not paying extra taxes and paying your own insurance is better, rather than paying super high taxes and betting on a lumbering, ineffective government health care system.

Example: When my mom was sick with Hep C, she went to the Mayo Clinic.. her liver over the years made such a complete reversal that it is suitable for organ donation!

When my aunt was sick with Hep C, the same ailment, she went to a government clinic in Louisiana. Worst treatment imaginable, she's not got that much longer with us, anymore, sadly.


However, with this option and a government to promise not to tap into the funds, I would wholehartedly support a system for healthcare where you could choose whether or not to pay into it. Higher tax rates means government coverage in the government system. However, you can be exempt from the healthcare tax but have to use the private system (As in emergencies, it'd be like now where they treat you no questions asked, and then charge you afterwords)

 

[The Monkey]

We got the opposite problem here in Sweden. We got 100% free healthcare, but almost no provate enterprise, that means loooong queues for operations and such.

 

[CptStern]

Along with the price of healthcare comes some of the best treatment, however.

I'm also not going to pay for someone else's illness who I don't even know. Not paying extra taxes and paying your own insurance is better, rather than paying super high taxes and betting on a lumbering, ineffective government health care system.

45 million of your fellow americans have no healthcare. 74% of those are working class famlies.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

I don't know. I can understand why you might object to it, but trans-sexuals are deeply unhappy with their predicament (ie: their birth gender) and if Simon to Simone is the cure, then I'm not sure that it's so different to prescribing NHS-funded anti-depressents or psychological therapy to depressives.

I don't know about that. I think its a big grey area really. On the one hand it could be seen as a genuine "illness" but on the other hand, it could be looked at as vanity, or someone wanting to improve themselves. For example, if at some point in the future, there were augmentations that could make us stronger. Then, someone who was born weaker than the general population may wish to gain the benefits of these augmentations and since they're naturally weaker than other people they could argue that it is a disability that should be paid for on the NHS. But on the other hand, it could viewed upon as just a person wanting a better body for free.

Theres a whole other side to this I have with people wanting a sex change, but that would be too politically uncorrect to talk about :x.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

45 million of your fellow americans have no healthcare. 74% of those are working class famlies.

I'm in a working class family. My parents don't have college, my dad didn't finish high school. Even if they are trying hard, why should WE be paying for them? It's not my problem.

This is also why I support that optional healthcare tax system. It'd be tough to implement at first. But it'd be a pretty good deal, pleasing all sides of the issue.

 

[The Monkey]

I'm in a working class family. My parents don't have college, my dad didn't finish high school. Even if they are trying hard, why should WE be paying for them? It's not my problem.

Beacouse they are human beings.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Beacouse they are human beings.

Perhaps they should start taking care of themselves.

 

[The Monkey]

Perhaps they should start taking care of themselves.

And the children? Should they take care of themselves too?

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

And the children? Should they take care of themselves too?

Optional Healthcare Tax System!

It solves all the problems

It's like the retail sales tax!

:[

 

[KoreBolteR]

isnt communism about paying your wealth for poorer ones?

 

[HunterSeeker]

isnt communism about paying your wealth for poorer ones?

Its about equal distribution of wealth pretty much.

 

[The Monkey]

Optional Healthcare Tax System!

It solves all the problems

It's like the retail sales tax!

:[

So in other words, the rich and the children should have healthcare, while the poor should stay ill?

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

So in other words, the rich and the children should have healthcare, while the poor should stay ill?

The Optional Healthcare Tax system works where if you accept the taxes of a system with it, you reap the benefits.

Those who choose to not pay the tax are barred from it (Well, they can GO to the facility but have to pay just the same as a private place). That way I can still have my private health, which I feel is a lot better than government, and not have to pay for some other people I don't even know.

There's also the thing of people making "poor" to seem like a race. As if it's something you personally can't help.

Personal choices are what affect that.

 

[The Monkey]

The Optional Healthcare Tax system works where if you accept the taxes of a system with it, you reap the benefits.

Those who choose to not pay the tax are barred from it (Well, they can GO to the facility but have to pay just the same as a private place). That way I can still have my private health, which I feel is a lot better than government, and not have to pay for some other people I don't even know.

Taxes shouldn't be optional, then it wouldn't be taxes. The very idea of taxes is that the rich will pay for the very basic of the poor/not so wealthy. If the people that could afford private health care, the rich, would stop paying taxes, then the whole system would collapse and there would be no public health care at all.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Taxes shouldn't be optional, then it wouldn't be taxes. The very idea of taxes is that the rich will pay for the very basic of the poor/not so wealthy. If the people that could afford private health care, the rich, would stop paying taxes, then the whole system would collapse and there would be no public health care at all.

No, that's not the idea of taxes at ALL. Taxes, at least in America, were never meant to include income taxes. Tarriffs and Sales Tax were meant to provide for the security of the nation, including police and military.

It's NOT my job to pay for some bum who doesn't want to work hard and take care of themselves.

 

[jondy]

It's NOT my job to pay for some bum who doesn't want to work hard and take care of themselves.

If your job took a U-turn, and you couldn't get out of debt, or if you had to support a growing family on minimum wage, you'd see things differently. How your life turns out is as much luck as it is choice, and as a wealthier individual it is your responsibility to chip in a little and help people who aren't as fortunate as you. That is if you believe in any sense of society at all.

Using your reasoning above, you must also be against progressive taxation, welfare and state sponsored education; after all, why should some poor kid reap the benefits of free education when their slacker parents don't pay for it?

God Bless America.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

If your job took a U-turn, and you couldn't get out of debt, or if you had to support a growing family on minimum wage, you'd see things differently. How your life turns out is as much luck as it is choice, and as a wealthier individual it is your responsibility to chip in a little and help people who aren't as fortunate as you. That is if you believe in any sense of society at all.

Using your reasoning above, you must also be against progressive taxation, welfare and state sponsored education; after all, why should some poor kid reap the benefits of free education when their slacker parents don't pay for it?

God Bless America.

No, I'll never be on welfare, I never will accept it or enroll in it, I will not make others pay for me, sorry. I wouldn't BE raising a family on minimum wage, it's about CHOICES, not luck.

Yes, I am against progressive taxation and against welfare. I have said previously in this thread even about a National Retail Sales Tax with essentials such as food as the exception. I support state education up to High School (12th, in America, up to age 18) because it is neccessary for the security of the nation. That's why tougher standards were even put into schools here in the first place, to help catch up with Russian intelligencia and science.

 

[el Chi]

No, I'll never be on welfare, I never will accept it or enroll in it, I will not make others pay for me, sorry. I wouldn't BE raising a family on minimum wage, it's about CHOICES, not luck.

Utter nonsense. Can someone CHOOSE if they're born into an impoverished background? Can someone CHOOSE whether they get fired by their bosses because of cut-backs?
I'd imagine that, given the CHOICE, most people on the dole aren't on the dole because they WANT to be. I very much doubt they're sat there, getting very little money to get by on (pay rent, bills, taxes, food, clothes, etc.), thinking:
"Well, I'm awfully glad I CHOSE to be unemployed and poor. Yes, this really is nothing to do with a bad hand that got dealt to me. This really is where I wanted to be in life."
I honestly can't comprehend how you could possibly think differently.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Utter nonsense. Can someone CHOOSE if they're born into an impoverished background? Can someone CHOOSE whether they get fired by their bosses because of cut-backs?
I'd imagine that, given the CHOICE, most people on the dole aren't on the dole because they WANT to be. I very much doubt they're sat there, getting very little money to get by on (pay rent, bills, taxes, food, clothes, etc.), thinking:
"Well, I'm awfully glad I CHOSE to be unemployed and poor. Yes, this really is nothing to do with a bad hand that got dealt to me. This really is where I wanted to be in life."
I honestly can't comprehend how you could possibly think differently.

Every single person I've ever met who's been on welfare or food stamps has just milked it.

Yes, a HUGE AMOUNT of them DO choose to be on it, because it's free for them without having to work.

If you really don't think a majority of those on it aren't abusing it, you need to look into these things, seek out the people who are on it and such.

I for one, would never be- no. I won't accept dirty money, because that's what it is, the government stealing a portion of someone's own personal earnings to give to those who did not earn it.

It is not my job to pay for these people. It does not make me selfish to keep what I worked for. We're talking the analogy of the ant and the grasshopper here.

 

[jondy]

It is not my job to pay for these people. It does not make me selfish to keep what I worked for. We're talking the analogy of the ant and the grasshopper here.

Well, thank god Bush is there to cut your taxes.

It's lucky the whole of America doesn't think like you, otherwise a shitload of people would die. Why is welfare pretty much standard in Western governments? Weimar Germany had it ( which was one of the most advanced democracys in the world before Hitler screwed it over ), England introduced it in the early 1900's ( before WWI, although attitudes hadn't completely changed ), France, Germany, ad nauseam. This isn't a coincidence. Even more pertinent, it was brought into being, in most cases, by rightwingers who'd just had democracy thrust upon them. People like you. It's necessary, it improves peoples quality of life and gives them more options.

I don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to the fact that people in life are not born out into the world equal. If you can see this, the rest of your argument falls down around your ears.

 

[el Chi]

Rakurai, perhaps welfare in the US is higher than it is here in the UK, although I doubt it. And, here in the UK, the dole is not the best way to live. Maybe some people are fine with it, but I'd be more than a bit surprised if they were in the majority or if their standard of living was good.

At the end of the day we're not going to agree on this, so sod it. I think you're an incomprehensibly selfish prick who doesn't give a shit about your fellow man as long as you're ok, with a blinkered view on the world and the impoverished. You appear to think I'm a pussy who's willing to give away my hard-earned cash to lazy bastards choosing to suck me dry because they're fine with living in squalor so long as they don't have to do work.
What a fabulous compromise.

 

[Apos]

I'm also not going to pay for someone else's illness who I don't even know.

You already do. When people who can't afford basic medical care coverage get REALLY sick, they end up emergency rooms, which can't turn them away. Who do you think pays for that? You do: via higher insurance premuims.

The major reason health costs are so much lower in the rest of the world is simply because so much of the cost in health care comes from bad preventative care: i.e. people waiting until it takes a 400,000 proceedure to cure what could have been cured with a daily asprin two years ago. While American medical care includes some of the best doctors and proceedures in the world, the vast majority of people camn't afford them anyway, and basic coverage for all would not prevent those best doctors from charging even more for their services.

 

[The Monkey]

No, that's not the idea of taxes at ALL. Taxes, at least in America, were never meant to include income taxes. Tarriffs and Sales Tax were meant to provide for the security of the nation, including police and military.

Then I guess that taxes don't are the same in America as in Sweden.

But how could you be against welfare? You live in one of the richest countries in the world, why should only some of its inhabitants be allowed to enjoy its wealth?

How much do you pay in income tax anyways? I'm sure that it's less than we do.

 

[CptStern]

Every single person I've ever met who's been on welfare or food stamps has just milked it.

Yes, a HUGE AMOUNT of them DO choose to be on it, because it's free for them without having to work.

that's not true ..if you go to your local food bank on the holidays (christmas, thanksgiving) the majority of the people are families. Ironically a lot of these people have jobs yet still have to rely on foodbanks

If you really don't think a majority of those on it aren't abusing it, you need to look into these things, seek out the people who are on it and such.

single mothers as well?, the elderly? you're saying the majority of people on welfare are defrauding the government? that either says one of 2 things about the government: either they're very stupid or very charitable (they knowingly give welfare cheques to people who are robbing them)

I for one, would never be- no. I won't accept dirty money, because that's what it is, the government stealing a portion of someone's own personal earnings to give to those who did not earn it.

do you live on your own? do you support yourself? pay rent, pay for food/clothes/stuff yourself? most people in the workforce are living 1 paycheque away from being homeless. lose your job/get sick etc and how soon would you lose your house/apartment?
15.3 million americans are considered "working poor"

"More than two-thirds of all poor families with children included one or more individuals who worked in 2003. .........The U.S. Census Bureau defines poor families as those with cash incomes of less than $14,680 a year for a family of three – or $18,810 for a family of four. In 2003, the average poor family had an income of $8,858, or $738.00 per month."

source


you cant live on that kind of income ..you cant even pay rent on that income

It is not my job to pay for these people. It does not make me selfish to keep what I worked for. We're talking the analogy of the ant and the grasshopper here.

I'm sure without the help of your family you wouldnt have gone far in life. not everyone is so fortunate.

 

[RZAL]

Do you agree with this statement?

“Drug manufacturers are currently earning enormous profits at the expense of older Americans. The United States House of Representatives Government Reform and Oversight Committee recently completed a study concluding that many Americans, especially senior citizens, are paying significantly more for identical medications than citizens of neighboring countries.

For the past couple of years, Congress has debated numerous bills that purport to provide effective cost containment for prescription drugs, however, such efforts, so far, have been futile. It is clear that the government is unlikely to provide relief in the near future leaving seniors and other citizens to their own devices.”

Does anyone here work in a pharmacy or a drug manufacturer within the USA? If so would you please tell the world just how much profit your company is making off prescription drugs?

Both congress and the press like to blame the high cost of meds on large drug companies, when in-fact local pharmacies are just as much at fault. Don’t believe me? Get the inside scoop from your local drug store, I have seen profits range anywhere from 500% to 1000% and above… that’s right, gouge the old folks, their insurance will pay for it.




The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Well, thank god Bush is there to cut your taxes.

It's lucky the whole of America doesn't think like you, otherwise a shitload of people would die. Why is welfare pretty much standard in Western governments? Weimar Germany had it ( which was one of the most advanced democracys in the world before Hitler screwed it over ), England introduced it in the early 1900's ( before WWI, although attitudes hadn't completely changed ), France, Germany, ad nauseam. This isn't a coincidence. Even more pertinent, it was brought into being, in most cases, by rightwingers who'd just had democracy thrust upon them. People like you. It's necessary, it improves peoples quality of life and gives them more options.

I don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to the fact that people in life are not born out into the world equal. If you can see this, the rest of your argument falls down around your ears.

It was actually a refund of a tiny bit already paid. People ARE born with equal chances in this society. This is not caste ridden India of the early 1900, your own choices affect what becomes of you. I can tolerate, within reason, children being taken care of as far as that goes. There is no way for them to help themselves. I know of many family situations, personally here, where the child needs to be taken away from the welfare abusing parents.

Rakurai, perhaps welfare in the US is higher than it is here in the UK, although I doubt it. And, here in the UK, the dole is not the best way to live. Maybe some people are fine with it, but I'd be more than a bit surprised if they were in the majority or if their standard of living was good.

At the end of the day we're not going to agree on this, so sod it. I think you're an incomprehensibly selfish prick who doesn't give a shit about your fellow man as long as you're ok, with a blinkered view on the world and the impoverished. You appear to think I'm a pussy who's willing to give away my hard-earned cash to lazy bastards choosing to suck me dry because they're fine with living in squalor so long as they don't have to do work.
What a fabulous compromise.

I never said living on welfare is the best way to live, but I said a huge amount of those on it are simply milking it. They are on it because it's comfortable and free. They AREN'T trying to take care of themselves and will rely on others to pay their way for the rest of their lives until the option is removed and they are forced to take initiative.

I think that's pretty offensive, and yes, you may be willing to give your hard earned money away to undeserving strangers, but I'm not, so don't force that government system on everyone. That's what charities are for.

You already do. When people who can't afford basic medical care coverage get REALLY sick, they end up emergency rooms, which can't turn them away. Who do you think pays for that? You do: via higher insurance premuims.

The major reason health costs are so much lower in the rest of the world is simply because so much of the cost in health care comes from bad preventative care: i.e. people waiting until it takes a 400,000 proceedure to cure what could have been cured with a daily asprin two years ago. While American medical care includes some of the best doctors and proceedures in the world, the vast majority of people camn't afford them anyway, and basic coverage for all would not prevent those best doctors from charging even more for their services.

I agree with a good amount of this, but it's a touchy subject. After all, they are free people too, and should be able to charge what they please. I don't think a majority can't get that care though, or at least the early basic care that is needed.

Then I guess that taxes don't are the same in America as in Sweden.

But how could you be against welfare? You live in one of the richest countries in the world, why should only some of its inhabitants be allowed to enjoy its wealth?

How much do you pay in income tax anyways? I'm sure that it's less than we do.

EVERYBODY is allowed to enjoy wealth and happiness. You earn it on your own. You are talking as if it's one big collective money safe that people withdraw from with set in stone tablets limiting what they can aspire to. The sky is the limit here. What you are depends on what choices you make.

that's not true ..if you go to your local food bank on the holidays (christmas, thanksgiving) the majority of the people are families. Ironically a lot of these people have jobs yet still have to rely on foodbanks

Foodbanks are entirely volunteer and I support them and donate to them, some folks could use a helping hand.

single mothers as well?, the elderly? you're saying the majority of people on welfare are defrauding the government? that either says one of 2 things about the government: either they're very stupid or very charitable (they knowingly give welfare cheques to people who are robbing them)

Actually, single mothers- yes, all single mothers I know on WIC, as it's called here in Arizona (Women In Crisis) are abusing the benefits. This isn't ALL single mothers but it's an accurate representation. The children should be taken away if they're being put into that situation with no attempts to rectify it. I'd agree with you that the government is being very stupid.

do you live on your own? do you support yourself? pay rent, pay for food/clothes/stuff yourself? most people in the workforce are living 1 paycheque away from being homeless. lose your job/get sick etc and how soon would you lose your house/apartment?
15.3 million americans are considered "working poor"

"More than two-thirds of all poor families with children included one or more individuals who worked in 2003. .........The U.S. Census Bureau defines poor families as those with cash incomes of less than $14,680 a year for a family of three – or $18,810 for a family of four. In 2003, the average poor family had an income of $8,858, or $738.00 per month."

source


you cant live on that kind of income ..you cant even pay rent on that income

I live with my parents. However, since I can't give an example of myself as I'm not yet of age, my parents definately didn't have a good boost from their parents in making something good of themselves.

15.3 Million is FAR from most as you said in the sentence right before it. 15.3 million are classified as the definition you gave. And again, since when was that my fault? I don't remember causing all that to happen to people I've never even heard of. Private charities can take care of it, but don't FORCE others and STEAL from them to give it to others who didn't earn it.

I'm sure without the help of your family you wouldnt have gone far in life. not everyone is so fortunate.

I am not depending on others to take care of me when I'm on my own. Everyone HAS equal chances in this society, it's the choices you make that determine what becomes of your life.

 

[GhostFox]

Healthcare in Canada is terrible. Public healthcare does not benefit most of the population. US needs to institute manditory health insurance. You are required to be insured, and rates are subsidized based on income. Policys would come from private insurance companies that would bid for blocks of customers. This way they can maintain the current state of top of the line health care, yet make sure everyone is covered. It also eliminates you from paying for other peoples medical bills, which galls anyone with even tiny grain of individual responsibility.