Monday, February 17, 2014

A Mandatory Clarification

For well over a year now, I have supported a healthcare reform package that includes a) personal health savings accounts, b) subsidies to the poor, and c) a high deductible catastrophic policy for emergencies. The part of this proposal where I may not have been clear enough is that in order for this plan to be workable (getting everybody into the risk pool), a and b would have to be mandated. I mean, I probably thought that this was something that should have been understood and obvious but, yes, being that there are in fact some sub-par intellects out there who seemingly read this stuff, I absolutely should have been much more clear; MANDATORY HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS (either a % of income like Singapore or a minimum-maximum situation).

1 comment:

dmarks said...

I guess I can say I am on board. I am resistive toward mandates, and don't want them done lightly.

However, your (B) mandate really means welfare for the needy, right? So that's always been fine with me. And (a) is not so bad, since it does not involve mandates to the most dangerous plutocrats of all: the federal government.

There, lets give it a go.

However, I do not have the final word on it. Far from it. Those who favor handouts to big corporations (in the form of forced business) or giving more power to the already grossly over-powerful central government already have too much say in this.