RonPaul "The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force..."

Shark, jump. Hand signals while driving are still legal, but if the turn indicators do not work (or are not used) the State will slap a financial penalty on the driver and/or owner. I do not have a "land-line" phone, but part of my elecric (and Internet) payments are paid to the telephone company for use of their poles - if I try to stop paying on that basis the companies and courts will quickly act, potentially with force.

Government(s) do things I do not like, but I do not want to go entirely without.

John A, do you think Mitt Romney should be forced to carry health care insurance? It provides him no benefit: he can simply pay out of pocket.

As for your telephone pole example, you're using someone else's equipment for your benefit. Of course you should pay a small rent. And I should point out that benefit starts right now.

For an 18 year old in 2014, when the tax kicks in, he may not need that benefit for several years. But you know what? when he sees his money going to this service, he's going to use it. Got a sniffle, stubbed your toe, or just not feeling so hot? go to the clinic, it's free.

Till there's a line out the door, and around the block because everyone is doing the same thing. Whither the tens of thousands of properly trained warm bodies it will take to make this work? nah, they didn't bother working on that part of the problem.

Too bad Ron and his supporters couldn't stick to that message during the campaign, instead of going off into black-helicopters mode.

In a free society, therefore, individuals could opt out of "Obamacare" without paying a government tribute.

And those individuals would also be free to pay cash up front at the emergency room for non-lifesaving treatment (and afterward for lifesaving treatment).

As long as the emergency room (built and maintained by the insurance payers among us) is forced to provide care without promise of payment, it's not free market medicine.

Health insurance is the way responsible people ensure there will be a doctor and hospital available when they need one, by building a healthcare system beforehand. When the government mandates that people can crash that system without paying, it means the rest of us are being forced to subsidize their care.

While I vehemently disagree with Obamacare's heavy-handed mandate/penalty system, I find that too many of those who rant about the "freedom" and "liberty" to opt out of paying for health insurance still expect the hospital to be available to them whenever they need it.

Conan, that's not "insurance". Insurance has participants who do not avail themselves of the service.

Here.

Not all the folks who get health insurance will use it.

Some will die before using it (accident, murder, natural disaster, heart attack, etc.).

Some will make excessive use of it (cancer, emphysema, etc.).

Some will live freakishly healthy lives until the suddenly die of nothing.

By having insurance, they are making sure a system is in place (hospitals, doctors, etc.) to take care of them when and if they need it.

Who's gonna pay in excess of $300 each month for a program that says, "Listen, pal, you don't need a primary physician right now. You're young and healthy. If you ever feel bad, you call us and we'll get started building that hospital and training some doctors."

To clarify: Insurance has participants who do not avail themselves of the service.

Some drivers do not make claims, and the industry adjusts rates based on demonstrated risk levels.

ALL persons enrolled in health-care programs who go to doctors USE that program.

Socialized medicine is not insurance, period.

Auto insurance can be adjusted by the providers, and there is no entitlement involved, either. But that's another issue.

The root of the problem is the idiot's dream, that the same government he claims screws up everything is just magic when it comes to paying a doctor.

My issue is not that Obamacare is wonderful. It isn't. It will bankrupt the country.

Or that it isn't socialized medicine. It is. And I'm opposed to socialized medicine.

My issue is that people who claim to want to opt out of health insurance and/or socialized medicine expect that the hospital and the medical care system will be available to them at little or no cost ... when they've done nothing to support its creation and maintenance.

=========================

I would prefer a true free market medical system.

Unbundle insurance from employers and stop expecting corporate America to bankroll the liberal dream of socialized medicine.

Allow people to buy health insurance from any carrier in any state and keep that insurance intact and with them if they move to another state or change jobs.

Encourage medical savings accounts in which people exercise some degree of control over how and on what their money is spent. And let the money rollover from year to year so people have a medical nest egg at retirement.

Rein in medical malpractice lawsuits (not eliminate them) so medical providers aren't conducting multiple tests just to avoid a lawsuit. Let the doctors practice medicine, not the lawyers.

Obamacare does none of this.

Obamacare is not a fix to the healthcare issues this country faces. It's an attempt to bolt the old infrastructure onto modern technology and lifestyles ... because the Democratic Party stalwarts are heavily involved and invested in the old infrastructure. Obamacare is a brand new buggy whip in an age of automobiles.

Conan - follow my link above, and that idea does everything you've asked for - though malpractice is addressed indirectly, by personal decisions involving health care options.