4 ms·
> But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh. That would be fair if he signed a waiver that sta
by emperorcezar 13y ago
> But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh.
That would be fair if he signed a waiver that stated he denied any care if they drop him off in the emergency room. If he's in an accident and unconscious, they are going to take him to the hospital where he'll be treating insurance or not. Without insurance that cost will more likely than not just be spread around.
- fennecfoxen 13y ago... and thank you for demonstrating exactly who's-to-say.
- joshontheweb 13y agoJust because I don't have insurance doesn't mean I can't/won't pay for emergency care.
- emperorcezar 13y agoThen the government should require you to post a bond for a reasonable amount to cover that eventuality. I don't think most people have over 100k sitting around. Many young people think it isn't a big deal, they'll just pay if something happens. Except when it does and now they owe over 100k in bills. Oh, and at the same time they are sick or injured. Now they can't pay, so everyone else does. Just because _you_ can or can't do something doesn't mean that on aggregate people can or can't. Society must use the situation as a whole. On the whole, many people can't pay and the costs have increased for everyone else.