Here is a simplified point of view of the principle of federally mandated health insurance:
I have on my desk a Sanford Uniball Micro rollerball ink pen (black).
It costs roughly $.75, or $1.50 + tax for a pack of two.
The government says, "We believe everyone's work would improve if they had a Sanford Uniball Micro rollerball ink pen. We require you purchase 10 packs of these pens for a year's supply (that's $15.00/year, + tax), and that you purchase the blue ink pen." Pretty cheap, huh?
However, I want to be able to choose my own pen. I want a different color, black, but the government says I have to buy blue. I refuse, and I pay a fine for not purchasing the blue pen, and I have no choice in the matter.
Ok, I'll just use my PC and go paperless. What's that? I HAVE to buy them anyway, though I now no longer need it? Why?
What if I write my notes in shorthand, and I need 5 packs instead of 10, because I don't need to buy 10? Oh. I still have to buy 10. And I neither need or want the 10. I get five more pens than I need.
At the end of ten years, I have 50 pens I have purchased, with five more per year I will not use, and I will never use, because my government told I had to buy them. In other words, I spent $75 on pens I will never use, and as they get older become unusable (ink dries out, dry rot, etc.). Not only that, my pens are non-transferable. I can't give the pens away or sell my excess pens.
Each year I get angrier because my government forces me to purchase pens I don't like, in quantities that don't suit my needs, and can never be utilized if I do not use them.
Preposterous, you say? Well, no more preposterous than what is now law regarding insurance.
No comments:
Post a Comment