To the morons trying to compare car insurance to health insurance...

[Gravitycollapse]

Here's the actual set of analogs:

The car is analogous to the human body
The car insurance is analogous to the health insurance
The car accident is analogous to bodily injury or illness
The damage to the car is analogous to damage to the flesh

So, if you're trying to argue that being forced to have health insurance is like being forced to have car insurance, and now you want to say that you just won't own a car, then what you're actually saying in the analogy is that you have a magical capacity to exist outside of your own physical body.

Unless you're a ghost, that's going to be fairly difficult.

[Make7]

1. How come I still have to pay for oil changes if I have car insurance? ( n/t )

[Gravitycollapse]

3. Probably because the entire analogy is incredibly dumb.

[duffyduff]

22. Probably because you haven't even thought the issue through

to come up with such a silly OP.

[Fumesucker]

17. Electric cars need oil changes?

Who knew?

[solarhydrocan]

2. Obama was against mandates for the same reasons I am

He changed his mind, I didn't

[groundloop]

27. Not so much that he changed his mind, he accepted what was possible.....

Given the obstruction by Lieberman, Nelson, Baucus, etc. We needed every one of those votes in the Senate to overcome a republicon filibuster, and those particular "Democrats" had their own agenda. Without them being team players and at least allowing a vote we had nothing. At a minimum progress was made. It's not what I wanted either, but at least we made progress.

[kelly1mm]

4. You do know that mandatory car insurance is required to protect OTHER people/their property? nt

[Gravitycollapse]

5. The analogy is dumb. But I'm taking it to its logical conclusion to prove a point.

That is, the analogy to not owning a car is not possessing a physical body. Which is not possible.

[duffyduff]

24. Your analysis of your analogy is a complete fail and makes no sense at all

because you deliberately create a false argument.

Health insurance isn't health care.

[JVS]

25. so is mandatory health insurance

it protects the hospitals from people running up a bill and never paying.

[JayhawkSD]

6. You can choose not to drive a car.

I guess you can also choose not to live, but that's a pretty drastic choice.

Not an anti-Obamacare rant, just an observation.

[duffyduff]

21. You can get health care without insurance. A car is a necessity almost everywhere in the United

States.

It is a virtual requirement in order to work. Public transportation is a shitty option, if it is even available, almost everywhere outside of a handful of urban areas.

[JayhawkSD]

34. Don't get all huffy and upset.

I was making a light hearted observation. Something related to a joke. I was not suggesting that there was anything wrong with driving or commenting on the state of social mores. It was something trivial, said mostly in fun.

And, for what it's worth, many people can and do choose not to drive a car. The fact that for some people such a choice would be very difficult does not invalidate my statement, because a choice being difficult does not make the choice impossible. They can still choose not to drive a car.

Why is it that no matter what someone says, no matter how trivial, there is someone else who just has to say that they are wrong?

[deathrind]

7. Car insurance is mandated.

If you want to drive a car. But you are right driving is a choice not a necessity. Healthcare should be treated the same way as a personal choice. But that cuts both ways. If one chooses to not have health insurance or the means to pay for the injuries from being t-boned by the person running the red light or from the sudden MI at 2am one should have no expectations of treatment.

[Gravitycollapse]

8. No, participation in a national insurance or health care pool should be compulsory.

Precisely because one has the right to life.

Otherwise, especially with your argument, we delve into an underworld where poor people who have no health insurance are going to be left for dead because jackasses will argue they chose not to participate.

[deathrind]

9. I agree with you.

But there are many who don't grasp that healthcare is a privledge not a right because it has been with us for so long. Sure everyone has a right to life but life unlike healthcare/treatment is not a for profit endeavor.

[Gravitycollapse]

11. I don't think you agree with me because I believe health care is a right, not a privilege.

[deathrind]

16. Ok

[duffyduff]

23. Health care isn't health insurance. You are trying to make an argument about insurance.

Your deliberately confusing the two is rather deceptive.

[Gravitycollapse]

31. Four comments in this thread. None of them understand my point. All of them are obnoxious.

Congrats.

[duffyduff]

20. You can get treated for health care without insurance. If you don't have car insurance,

you get screwed over big time.

People like you simply don't live in reality. Public transportation isn't a real option in most areas of the United States.

[Gravitycollapse]

32. "People like you simply don't live in reality." - Well aren't you just a little ray of sunshine.

If a service is cost prohibitive, insurance becomes a necessity. And denial of payment becomes a denial of service.

[NoOneMan]

10. Car insurance is about paying for people you hit on public roadways

Not everyone has to be covered. That's why kids who ride in cars don't have to be insured.

[Demo_Chris]

12. We care for the poor and near poor just enough to send them a new bill.

We mandate that they buy at least an essentially worthless bronze plan so that the wealthy amoung us can enjoy reduced cost healthcare.

The poor get the bill for the insurance, the wealthy get healthcare, and we call that a victory.

[Gravitycollapse]

13. Well...no. The rich already had health insurance. The ACA gives more people health insurance...

And the only actual hole in all of this was created by Republican governors who refused to expand Medicaid in their state. Which, I agree, is a huge hole. But that does not itself damn the ACA.

[Demo_Chris]

14. A mandate for insurance is ALL I need to damn the ACA...

We are told, repeatedly, that these mandates are necessary, and that the ACA cannot work without them.

The point of the mandate is to force those who either feel they do not need insurance, or cannot afford insurance, or will gain no benefit from their purchased insurance due to high deductibles, to purchase that insurance regardless of any benefit to them. The system only makes money if the people now forced to buy it receive less in benefits than their mandated insurance costs them. That difference is what allows for reduced or stabilized rates for the wealthy and guaranteed coverage for the wealthy with pre-existing conditions.

A mandate to purchase government provided healthcare seems reasonable. In that case everyone gets something for their money. But that's not what the ACA does.

[Gravitycollapse]

15. Uh, no. The mandate does not exist to make poor people pay for health insurance.

If that is your argument, I will leave you be because that is wholly and uncompromisingly dumb.

[Fumesucker]

18. Then why the huge deductibles in the insurance the poors will be able to "afford"? n/t

[duffyduff]

19. Forced car insurance and forced health insurance are examples of corporate welfare

Laws requiring them are designed to enrich an industry. They serve no real purpose but create hardships for many.

Unless you live in NY, SF, or some other large, urban area, a car is a necessity to have. You don't really need to have health insurance but access to health care. Health insurance does NOT equal health care, got it?

Your post makes utterly no sense whatsoever. It is an epic fail.

[dipsydoodle]

26. Only in respect

you can't insure against an accident that has already occured.

[treestar]

28. That question is already decided

The SCOTUS upheld the mandate. It's in for the foreseeable future.

Car insurance had nothing to do with the SCOTUS rationale. Thus even the mandate-supporter does not need that argument.

[PowerToThePeople]

29. Why should I be required by law to faten fat cats?

If something is required by law to be purchased, the entity supplying the item/service should be required to be a not-for-profit entity. I will not play this game. They can put me in tax evader prison for all I care. I'll get free health care, shelter, and food then.

[solarhydrocan]

36. + 40,000,000

"Why should I be required by law to faten fat cats?

If something is required by law to be purchased, the entity supplying the item/service should be required to be a not-for-profit entity. I will not play this game. They can put me in tax evader prison for all I care. I'll get free health care, shelter, and food then."

Brilliant. This should be an OP.

And extended to cars.

You have cut to the essence of the matter. Have to say it again:

If something is required by law to be purchased, the entity supplying the item/service should be required to be a not-for-profit entity.--PowerToThePeople

What we have now is blatant corporatism. And it sucks.

[JoePhilly]

30. Try to take your car to the ER for repairs

after a crash.

Also, my car insurance protects you and other drivers.

My Heath insurance protects you from having to pay for my health care.

[hughee99]

33. And if I can't afford car insurance, I can sell my car. What if I can't afford health insurance?

n/t