>>>In the land of the free the individual is everything. So "I'm not ill or old so why should I pay for health care I may never use".
>
>Underwriting includes investment of surpluses to cover predictable future need. The whole system falls over if there are no surpluses because you only insure once you need a payout and the insurers aren't allowed to say "no." Either they go broke or premiums have to exceed the cost of care you'll consume +50% to cover admin and insurer profit.
>
>If there's no national scheme, the individual mandate (meaning you must insure) is the cornerstone of an insurance healthcare system. But if you can't afford it and can't afford the penalties that are waived or postponed anyway, then the cracks start. Why would any economically savvy young person not decide "they can't afford it" or weasel their way into the galaxy of exceptions, if relatively small penalties are waived or postponed repeatedly and you are guaranteed insurance if you get sick and want a payout?

I know I was being ironic.

Here out health system is showing the cracks due to chronic under investment. Personally I think the Conservative narrative is to degrade the system by underfunding so they can say "it doesn't work" and introduce a more USA market style system.

I do think people need to get real though and accept that the NHS is not a bottomless reserve and at some point it has to ration. Individuals should take more responsibility to exercise and eat healthily so less in spent on treating life style disorders. the government could nudge in that direction by rewarding people for trying to be being healthy or taxing junk food.