<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"

	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"

	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"

	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"

	
	>

<channel>

	<title>New answer on: Why Is Mandatory Health Insurance Good?</title>

	<atom:link href="https://www.insurancelibrary.com/health-insurance/why-is-mandatory-health-insurance-good/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

	<link>https://www.insurancelibrary.com/health-insurance/why-is-mandatory-health-insurance-good</link>

	<description></description>

	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:23:46 -0600</lastBuildDate>

	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>

	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>

	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>


	<item>

		<title>By: Jim Winkler</title>

		<link>https://www.insurancelibrary.com/health-insurance/why-is-mandatory-health-insurance-good</link>

		<dc:creator>Jim Winkler</dc:creator>

		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:51:50 +0000</pubDate>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.insurancelibrary.com/health-insurance/why-is-mandatory-health-insurance-good</guid>


		<description><![CDATA[That is an excellent question, and I am glad that you asked it! With all of the misinformation that has been spread about the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) it has been difficult to figure out what is true, and what isn&#039;t. As you know, the Act mandated health care for everyone. The reason for this was two fold. The first reason is that for many people, the only reason that they bought it was because they were unhealthy, and were afraid that their health would at some point require expensive treatments. ( which statistically, it did). This raised the overall costs of insurance for everyone. By mandating the insurance, The pool of applicants now included all of the &quot;healthy people &quot; as well, which theoretically, and statistically lowers the per-person cost of insurance. The other reason was that people who could afford insurance but didn&#039;t buy it were receiving medical treatment anyway. Who do you think was paying for that treatment? Yup, we were. Now some of that cost shifts back to the individual where it belongs, and not to the general public. That also should theoretically lower all of our treatment costs, as the medical practitioners are getting paid for their services.  Personal freedom arguments aside, financially it is a good idea, and it has worked well in Massachusetts since Mr. Romney instituted the plan there. Thanks for asking!]]></description>

		

	</item>


</channel>

</rss>

