[cody]

I can see both sides. Alex and Rob are simply saying, don't get rid of the stick and just give the carrot to the ass cuz he'll cop a squat and ask you for another one.

Scott and company are saying, that we all have a fundamental right to carrots (health) along with police, fire, etc. The cost shouldn't be unreasonable in the scheme of things, spread out among everyone and is a worthy investment.

For the record, I'm on Scott's side. I feel like protection from debilitating disease/injury and medical bankruptcy won't demotivate the working class, but simply protect it from cruel and unusual punishment.

Does anyone know if the following statement is true or not? It's something I have been thinking.

The uninsured are a larger drain on the economy currently than they will be if we force them to get insurance, even if we have to subsidize the investment as taxpayers.

I mean, we force all drivers to have car insurance so that we're all protected from financial loss in an accident. Shouldn't the same principal apply to health insurance? When the uninsured have an emergency, doesn't the cost trickle down to everyone in the form of higher medical costs anyway? Don't we want as many people as possible to stay above the poverty line so that the economy thrives?

Oh, and also for the record, I'm not a fan of the government becoming an insurance company. I think that they should simply require all insurance companies to offer an affordable plan to everyone, but not so affordable that the insurance companies lose money. And everyone should be required to have at least that minimal plan.