Quote Originally Posted by honedright View Post
Affordable Care Act requires medical insurance policies to include the "Essential Health Benefits." From www.healthcare.gov:

"The Affordable Care Act ensures health plans offered in the individual and small group markets, both inside and outside of the Health Insurance Marketplace, offer a comprehensive package of items and services, known as essential health benefits. Essential health benefits must include items and services within at least the following 10 categories: ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

Insurance policies must cover these benefits in order to be certified and offered in the Health Insurance Marketplace. States expanding their Medicaid programs must provide these benefits to people newly eligible for Medicaid."
Thanks for your response. I wouldn't presume to speak for you but, should I assume you feel these services are still actually needed by some people but you shouldn't have to contribute to covering the costs? If not please correct me. If so then how would you propose covering the cost? Should it be the sole responsibility of the individual, parent or guardian? I'm sure you're aware of the rising health care costs in the US. What if they can't meet the burden? Should the care providers be forced to reduce their billings? What about the hospitals, insurance, drug or medical equipment companies? Should they have to reduce their prices to make it more affordable? If this requirement is not publically funded and no one steps up to provide it for free or at vastly reduced costs, look ahead and tell me what you think the likely result would be. Could it become "chaotic" and have a negative impact on your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? If there's even a slight chance of that, wouldn't you consider it money well spent?


Quote Originally Posted by honedright View Post
A common service we all use: Police and Fire services - we could all be individually responsible for our own policing and fire, but we as a society have agreed that such a system would be chaotic and inefficient, therefore we gladly pay a tax to government in order to provide those services for us. True that there will be those that benefit from those same services and have not paid into the system, but at least those who have paid get exactly what they paid for. And in this system, no one is forced to buy anything.
But what if some people don't agree with you. What if they don't gladly pay for them? What if they feel they can easy do it themselves and are also convinced that it will not be chaotic or inefficient. Should they be allowed to opt out because of this? Some people who currently pay taxes will tell you they don't receive the same level of service that others receive. They don't get "exactly what they paid for". Is that fair for them? Although you may feel you aren't being "forced to buy anything" I'd submit to you that in fact you are. The very fact that your taxes pay for these services means you've bought them. Granted you don't hand the police officer standing outside the grocery store a $20 bill as you leave with your newly acquired baby food but make no mistake the above transaction is the very definition per Webster of a purchase: "to get (something) by paying money for it". If you don't think you're being forced then try an experiment. Stop filing and paying your taxes.