Universal health care, Mitt Romney style

[John Dibble]

Unsure. I'd want to see more specific information. I like the idea of making people responsible for their own care, though.

[John Dibble]

Unsure. I'd want to see more specific information. I like the idea of making people responsible for their own care, though.

By having the government force them to be responsible?  I'm surprised you are considering this; it sounds more authoritarian than what I would expect you to support.  But it is one of the less intrusive reforms being proposed, so I think it is worth a shot.

Which is why I'm unsure and want to see specifics. Also, you must consider that I also consider it authoritarian for the taxpayers to be forced to pay other people's bills, so really it goes both ways. The best compromise would just to be to make people pay out of pocket if they can afford to do so(and don't have insurance) - if they can get Medicaid, good for them, otherwise you should pay. I don't think that's unreasonable - you receive a service from a private institution, you can afford to pay for it, so you pay for it. That in itself isn't authoritarian.

[John Dibble]

Isnt Romney destroying any form of choice?

A little: you can't choose not to have health insurance unless you "agree to pay [your] medical bills out of [your] own pocket", which apparently means that the state would garnish your wages.

Relatively speaking, this plan does allow more choice than any single-payer program suggested.

I don't see why.
Why can't I just pay a doctor out of my own pocket without the state keeping my wages?

I would imagine that's still an option - I'd make the wage garnishing an option only after the person shows they aren't gonna pay directly.