How is Mandated Health Care Different From Mandated Auto Insurance?

I'm just wondering what peoples' thoughts are on this specific talking point the dems use when defending the HCR Bill. Why is mandating health insurance different than mandating auto insurance?

reply to post by this_is_who_we_are

Why is mandating health insurance different than mandating auto insurance?

I can choose to have a car or not. I didn't have a choice about being born.

reply to post by octotom


I feel like such a fool. You're right of course. I should have thought that one through before starting this post... :-(

reply to post by octotom


not necessarily true, maybe you live in area where business's and such are close together, or there is some form of affordable public transportation.

where i live its different. everything is very very spaced out, it would cost me 40+ dollars in cab fairs to get to work or the grocery store, and there is no form of public transportation, also if you don't have a valid drivers license up here, good luck getting a job, because its one of the main requirements up here since it is almost impossible to function without a vehicle.

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
I'm just wondering what peoples' thoughts are on this specific talking point the dems use when defending the HCR Bill. Why is mandating health insurance different than mandating auto insurance?

The individual states mandate that you must carry auto insurance or not. The constitution does not give the federal government the right to force us to purchase anything.

The difference is that (in Texas) the minimum auto insurance you must have is liability. Liability covers the other guy in an accident not you! In health insurance they are forcing you to cover yourself. It is completely different.

reply to post by Alaskan Man


You could always move or stay where you are and live off the land. In the end, it's your choice. Know what I mean? People survived in Alaska for a while before cars came around.

reply to post by rangersdad


That's true that it's the states, rather than the federal government, that makes you get car insurance. But still, in the end, you can choose to not have a car.

I have been thinking about this all day and here iswhat I have come up with:

1) Mandatory Motor Liability Insurance is controlled at the state level (although tied to federal highway funds)

2) Most states allow you to have insurance or proof of liability protection (such as 200K sitting in a bank account)

3) Liability isurance is primarilly there to protect people that you injure due to accident or stupidity. You are not required to get insurance to protect against uninsured motorists usually. Health insurance is meant to protect your debtors from you going bankrupt when you get ill and can't work

reply to post by octotom


yes i could move away from the area i grew up in and love, but that wont happen, and i dont find that argument valid, its basically the "if you don't love America, then leave it" argument. why should i move because things are heading in the wrong direction instead of trying to fix it?

and yes, people did live here before automobiles, but there lives were incredible different then modern lives. by that logic, the entire world could scrap there cars and continue a regular life because people lived that way 100 years ago, but i don't see modern society functioning without some sort of automobile (transportation of food and goods would be almost non existent)

edited to add: i couldn't live off the land because i dont own much, and hunting/fishing regulations would keep me from acquiring the food i need.

[edit on 3/22/2010 by Alaskan Man]

I am old enough to remember when auto insurance was not mandated. Then you could buy a reasonable policy at a reasonable price. Insurance companies competed for your business.

Now we have mandated auto insurance - the premiums are over $1,000 per year for reasonable protection. However, just try to collect on the policy. The next year the premiums can be as high as $4 or $5000 / year.

Further, any wrong doing on your part - such as getting a ticket for speeding or not wearing a seat belt - your premiums go up. Insurance companies now have access to my private information.

Tell me again about how this is just like health insurance?

So that means if I smoke or I am overwieght or drink or refuse to participate in a minimum government mandated amount of exercise - my premiums go up? Insurance companies are now entitled to my private insurance?

Tired of Control Freaks

I am old enough to remember when auto insurance was not mandated. Then you could buy a reasonable policy at a reasonable price. Insurance companies competed for your business.

Now we have mandated auto insurance - the premiums are over $1,000 per year for reasonable protection. However, just try to collect on the policy. The next year the premiums can be as high as $4 or $5000 / year.

Further, any wrong doing on your part - such as getting a ticket for speeding or not wearing a seat belt - your premiums go up. Insurance companies now have access to my private information.

Tell me again about how this is just like health insurance?

So that means if I smoke or I am overwieght or drink or refuse to participate in a minimum government mandated amount of exercise - my premiums go up? Insurance companies are now entitled to my private insurance?

Tired of Control Freaks

Are you serious?!

The difference is poor people don't get free auto insurance.
This whole county is becoming a safe haven for morons and slackers.

The difference is this: If you do not have a are, you do not need auto insurance and do not get slapped with a large fine and possible felony conviction.
The new health care bill is enforced by the IRS, and if they feel you do not have the right health insurance, then you get slapped with a fine, and if you refuse to pay it, a felony conviction, and the loss of certain rights all cause you did not have health insurance. No health insurance means the loss of the right to vote or own a fire arm. Felons loose both rights.

How about this.... how about I goof off, quit working, start smoking pot, start drinking all day long, go out and impregnate a new woman every day, spray paint on the walls, break things, steal things, beat people, and you give me a free car, a free house, free health insurance, free auto insurance, free food, etc? Is that cool? Is that cool with you?

You should feel wonderful about supporting me. That is what you want to do isn't it? Am I correct here? You want to support other people who are free to be themselves and do as they please whether it makes any sense or no sense at all.

I think for most people simply not having a car is impractical at best and an impossibility at worst. I live in a rural parish in Louisiana with the nearest town about 20 miles away. And while I could just sell my place out in the swamp(I'm out there because we all know the S is gonna HTF one day) and move into town so I can walk around wherever I need to go, I also travel alot with my job. That requires me to have a good vehicle. And since I don't have 20,000 bucks just laying around I have to take out a loan which requires i have full coverage on said vehicle. I suppose I could quit my job and work at the local mickey-Ds or some other piddly job but that would be a drastic pay cut not to mention the wife probably packing up the dogs and leaving. So just "choosing not to have a car" is not really in my best interest. They've designed it that way.

reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire


Hey, I'm not taking sides. I just wanted to know what peoples' thoughts were on this. You hear this all the time "how's it different than auto insurance". Just putting it out there...

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by rangersdad

 

That's true that it's the states, rather than the federal government, that makes you get car insurance. But still, in the end, you can choose to not have a car.

Well, where I live there is no really good mass transit system, true we have buses and trains but you still need a vehicle to either get there or to get to your final destination.

reply to post by this_is_who_we_are


We're being flooded with Healthcare Reform Act threads.

I'm not going to explain on each and every person's thread.

I'll supply a link to one thread I posted on for all because ATS'ers need to start unifying, on one thread, and come to some sort of an agreement.

Government Shakedown : R.I.C.O. Act, Extortion, and the HealthSCARE ACT

Hidden within are binding laws that come together through legislation.

reply to post by this_is_who_we_are


As someone said, you don't have to have a car.

But it goes further.. it would be unconstitutional for the FEDERAL government to mandate ALL drivers in all states have Car Insurance. And if they didn't have a car, pay a fee.

If a STATE wants to mandate health insurance, and offer a state subsidy for those who cannot afford it, assuming it's directly voted on at the polls .. would be legal.