I mean, I get that progressives are too invested in their ideology to even acknowledge the question.*How does removing a requirement to purchase a thing, "or else", deprive people who WANT to purchase the thing, of the thing?— Drang (@DWDrang) November 19, 2017
Doesn't matter whether you replace "thing" with "widget", "candy bar", or "health insurance", people who WANT TO can still purchase it.
And socialists of all stripes would probably say that asking the question is racist, classist, sexist, and a dozen other "ists" I can't even think of right now.
But the fact remains that no one has proposed banning health insurance, nor even repealing the law that makes it a crime to refuse someone emergency care because they can't afford to pay for it.
They're just proposing that the government cease forcing people to spend money on something they don't want.
Remember, ultimately, any government requirement is backed up by someone with a gun.
BTW, if Obamacare was so great,
- Why does anyone have to be forced to buy it?
- Why do I know so many people with serious medical conditions and no health care?
* Ignoring the obvious question, how many of them are smart enough to even recognize the logical fallacy?