[Chancellor]

Quote by: Technosoul I like the idea but I have one big problem with that idea. It is my experience that the government often under-estimates what I can afford. For example: Let us say you claim you cannot afford extra money for mandatory health insurance. The government can say " but wait, you drive a car which is not a must have expendature, as you could walk or take a bus everywhere you go". So first you must sell your car and then when that money runs out then you would qualify for free or super cheap health care insurance and the Government would pick up the tab. They cite that many migrational people from Mexico walk, ride bikes, or use the bus to go to work and to the store. Thus, anyone can do the same thing as those real poor working people do. But I do not want to give up my car and walk everywhere. And if I pay to continue to use the car then paying for the health insurance would prevent me from buying gas or food and so that would force me to downsize my quality of living, one way or the other, to remain lawful. In effect the government would be in the business of telling me how to mangage my own family budget. What I can or cannot do without. However if the government is willing to take MY opinon on what I can afford to budget for health care insurence then fine. I am all for it. And each time the price of gas goes up, or the cost of a dozen eggs go up, I should have the right to pay that much less for my health insurance, so each month I should be able to adjust how much I must pay for that insurance so that it is always relative to the rising cost of living. If they up a utility bill, I pay less that month to the company providing health insurance. Is that not fair?

And just who the hell do you think you are to dictate that I or anyone else MUST BUY health insurance?