I would hazard to say that both of us aren't in the demographic where $20 matters.
But for a lot of people, $20 vs $250 is the difference between going to a doctor and not.
Separate from that there's the catastrophic vs no coverage argument. If you're struggling to make rent at the end of the month, it's probably a smarter personal bet not to buy insurance.
But patients without at least catastrophic are corrosive to our medical system, and what the ACA mandate was targeting.
Personally, I think the ACA mandate for a catastrophic policy, with preventative care included, and direct cash subsidies to people at the poverty line (to cover routine care) is the best solution.
I'd expect the ACA designers considered this, and only broadened the mandate requirements as a horse trade to insurers for assuming the risk of offering marketplace plans.
But for a lot of people, $20 vs $250 is the difference between going to a doctor and not.
Separate from that there's the catastrophic vs no coverage argument. If you're struggling to make rent at the end of the month, it's probably a smarter personal bet not to buy insurance.
But patients without at least catastrophic are corrosive to our medical system, and what the ACA mandate was targeting.
Personally, I think the ACA mandate for a catastrophic policy, with preventative care included, and direct cash subsidies to people at the poverty line (to cover routine care) is the best solution.
I'd expect the ACA designers considered this, and only broadened the mandate requirements as a horse trade to insurers for assuming the risk of offering marketplace plans.