Something just seems wrong about a lot of these stories citing the provision that they're allowed to remain on their parents insurance until they're 26. Because the story is really, "not having to worry about the high cost of health insurance afforded me the luxury of taking more financial and career risks." Surely we can do better for people who are older than 26 or who don't have the option of getting insurance through their parents. If we wanted to give everyone this kind of benefit we would just have universal healthcare with the state acting as everyone's 'parent'.
The counterpoint is course you're able to take more risks when you have fewer life-dependent expenses, so we should just pay for everyone's utilities, food, and housing too. You might even throw expenses for dependents in there too for older folks. What's special about healthcare except that it's expensive?
Deaths due to lack of medical care (2009)[3]: 45,000
What's different is the magnitude. Although the United State's patchwork of services for the homeless is ostensibly supposed to give everyone access to food and shelter, people do fall through the cracks. But it is not an endemic problem like lack of health care.
[1] Debatable, and I can't find a solid source. The only malnutrition related deaths I can find are in elderly populations and abused children.
I could decide to live in a tiny apartment, turn off the heater and eat ramen. With a chronic condition, there's no way I could have made healthcare a similarly manageable expense (other than maintain a full-time job and limit my entrepreneurship to nights/weekends).
> What's special about healthcare except that it's expensive?
Great question. Everyone needs food, everyone needs shelter, everyone needs medical care, but this deep passion only exists for the last item.
My opinion is because the system we have today is basically a wealth transfer from the taxpayers to large interest groups (nurses' unions, big pharma, etc).
> Everyone needs food, everyone needs shelter, everyone needs medical care, but this deep passion only exists for the last item.
Programs exist to make food and shelter universally available, as well, and while imperfect, the proportion of the population unable to afford food or shelter is lower than the pre (or even post) ACA rate of people being unable to afford healthcare.
The fact that the problem is less solved for healthcare is probably why there is more visible passion on the issue.
Yeah, I think it's hilarious that most of these were "I am and/or was under 26 so I can freeload off my parents' employer-provided plan! Thanks Obama!"
The healthcare system is totally a disaster, and it really should be fixed, but giving college-aged kids a free pass for a few more years isn't really a solution.
The counterpoint is course you're able to take more risks when you have fewer life-dependent expenses, so we should just pay for everyone's utilities, food, and housing too. You might even throw expenses for dependents in there too for older folks. What's special about healthcare except that it's expensive?