Header Image (book)


Saturday, February 11, 2012

FEATURED QUESTION: Healthcare Reform

(This post stuck here for a few days. Please scroll down for other material)

Recently Ann Coulter wrote "Three Cheers for Romneycare!" She stated:
...Until Obamacare, mandatory private health insurance was considered the free-market alternative to the Democrats' piecemeal socialization of the entire medical industry....
Read the entire essay HERE.

How does any kind of insurance work?

According to this source:
Transfer of Risk

Insurance cannot remove the risk or the likelihood that one might become a victim of any of these events, but what it does is transfer all or some of the financial impact of any of these events. Insurance exists to help individuals recover from the financial consequences of these events by pooling the resources of a large group to pay for the losses of a small group.


Law of Large Numbers

In order to afford to cover the financial losses of its customers, an insurance company needs a very large base of members. For each different type of loss that they insure against, insurance companies have years of statistics that help them calculate how many losses they are likely to have. They are counting on the law of large numbers which, when applied to insurance, states that the more members in an insured group, the more likely it is that the number of actual losses will be very close to the number of expected losses....
Read the rest HERE.

Many bristle at the health insurance individual mandate, primarily because, under the individual mandate, the government is requiring the individual to buy a particular product. Furthermore, according to THIS, the individual mandate has several significant hazards.

A matter that I've been puzzling about for some time:

Considering the rising costs of health care, the rising costs of health insurance premiums, and the coming tsunami of aging Baby Boomers (resulting in reduced opportunity for transfer of risk as well as a reduced tax base for funding private health insurance, Medicare, and Medicaid), what is the viable alternative to the individual mandate for health insurance?

WARNING! The comments thread to this post contains a heated discussion.


  1. ...and all AoW has to say is "go" and i'm history, beamish. I won't darken her doorstep again. I'm not here to aggravate AoW. It's a by-product of your negative presence.

    So much for wishing her the ability to control her blog.

  2. Uh, yeah. Except that that "first post" of yours in this thread abandoned your relentless four-month long berating me and stalking me across the blogosphere for my position on health care reform in favor of actually adopting my position wholesale.

    I guess you slipped a bit in your quest to be a pest to me, but you've restored your faith in that approach quite admirably.

    Now all that's left is for you to go back to sock puppeteering to yourself on the public dime while cogent discussions take place without you.

    But you'd have to admit to all as you have already to yourself that you've been a sore loser on arrival with your left-wing Naderite advocacy of totalitarianism all along, huh?

    And we can't have that. It might put you in the psych ward again, loser.

    You derive your perverse proxy for self-esteem from attacking your betters and polluting the blogs of people you can't hang with intellectually with sock puppet shows. Why you thought expanding beyond sock puppeting to yourself on your several imbeciliic Greek pederasty appreciation blogs would result in people giving a fuck about what idiots like yourself have to say on any topic is perhaps even more indicative of how low your intelligence actually is.

    Continue your bizarre obsession with getting your teeth kicked in by me at your leisure, but leave AOW alone.

  3. Stop.

    Or take it elsewhere.

    By "elsewhere" I do not mean to another thread on this blog.

    When I posted on this topic in the body of the post, I expected trouble to erupt. But I posted on this topic anyway because the topic is one that I've been struggling with. Yes, on a personal level.

    Anyone is welcome to comment on a topic at hand. But stalking, feuding, whatever you want to call it -- those actions are accomplishing nothing any longer.

    Any who read the comments at this thread and at the other thread with over 800 comments are drawing and will drawn their own conclusions. In my view, there really is nothing left for either of you to say.

    At this point, continued discussion serves only to irritate me. If you have any consideration for me at all, you'll stop. Now.

  4. |


    An Offering by FreeThinke


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective