Elizabeth Edwards is getting on my last nerve! I know she is passionate about this subject and I feel for her due to her cancer diagnosis, but she is just not seeing the big picture. She is acting on emotion, which is never a good idea. Emotions will deceive you. The reality is, government cannot possible make people better off. There is no possible Pareto improvement in this situation. I heard her say in an interview in early October with NPR that we need to approach health care in the same manner we approach auto insurance, requiring everyone to maintain coverage. She claims this will spread out the costs making it cheaper overall. This is just another liberal pulling on the strings of those who have less in an attempt to appeal to their needs, and people are so gullible!
Regarding mandatory auto insurance, it is very important to note that it is not required that a citizen maintains coverage for their own welfare, but only for the welfare of others. Only liability coverage is required! This is the case simply because an accident will most likely involve someone else and most likely injure that other person. If a person is injured in an accident, at the fault of someone else, what recourse does the injured have if the one who caused the crash has no money?
Also, it is my right not to purchase health care. What people like Mrs. Edwards do not seem to understand is that most of the people without coverage make the choice not to have health care. My husband and I fall into this category. We have not had health insurance since 2002. If we really wanted insurance, there are plenty of monthly expenses that could be cut; cell phone bill(s), internet service, car payment (buy an old car, God forbid), shopping an Whole Foods (which is a bit more costly than Food Lion)… Do you get the point? The fact is people are valuing these other consumables more than their health coverage. It is not anyone else’s problem if I or any other decides against health coverage. I don’t expect anyone else to pay for my healthcare when if I cut corners, I could pay for it myself. This is the case for MOST people. For those others that truly have a need, our system already is set up to help them.
Another reason I am against mandatory health care is that it will increase risk-taking behavior, better known as moral hazard. Mrs. Edwards and many other liberals insist that the costs will go down, but, in fact, the costs will go up because people will begin to act in a more risky manner, thereby causing them to make additional trips to the doctor or emergency room. Those currently without insurance are cautious about what they get involved in; cautious about how they drive, and do not take unnecessary risks. It is human nature that when one does not have to bear the full consequences of their actions (via paying the doctor bills) they will not be as cautious and the risk that they will injure themselves increases significantly. All of the additional patients that doctors will have to treat for a minimum costs will diminish incentives for the next generation to invest in becoming a doctor. The increase in demand for doctor services combined with a decrease in supply of new doctors is a standard economic recipe for very high medical costs. The next step will be for the government to put a price ceiling on medical costs leading to a major shortage of treatment availability. And we think our healthcare system is bad now.
