Aaron Durall and Healthcare Concerns for Low-Income Families

When discussing injustices related to healthcare systems around the world, the United States usually comes up. As one of the world’s most prominent economies, the U.S. is where more than 325 million people reside. Out of that number, the latest findings indicate that almost 13 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. That means that more than 43 million people struggle to earn the funds to cover their basic necessities. Unfortunately, health insurance is one of the items on the list of those essentials that many individuals go without.

Tying Health Insurance and Taxes

Of all the changes that President Obama made, one could argue that healthcare was altered the most. In order to make everyone obtain coverage, the prior administration added a provision within the tax code. That is the provision that requires the taxpayer to disclose the months during which they had insurance. Then, they get charged a penalty for every month absent proper healthcare policy.

Did the system work?

This system facilitated some changes and got more people insured. Sadly, however, it did not help low-earning citizens attain high-quality policies. Instead, it basically acted as added pressure to buy whatever insurance one can afford in order to minimize tax penalties. Ultimately, low-income families were purchasing coverage that would be completely useless with any major injury or medical condition. So, one could say that it did not come as a shock to see the new administration strike down this provision.

Ability to Pay

Aaron Durall, an experienced CPA, lawyer, and business owner, agrees that there are major discrepancies in the system. Large insurance providers continue to push rates that a lot of Americas cannot afford. The consequence of doing so? Poor people are either left out of the insurance conversation or they must buy cheap, low-quality coverage. Ultimately, such practices can lead to major issues with one's taxes and the healthcare plan itself.

Living With a Negative Connotation

People who are deemed poor in the United States are often subjected to negative and demeaning treatment. This is because the population considers low-income families to be body-able people who are simply lazy. As stated, that is absolutely not the case. In fact, most unemployed individuals do not shy away from working. They just seldom find opportunities that are necessary to lead a normal life.

Possible Solutions

Many years ago, the federal government in the United States was taking care of the healthcare for everyone. After the leadership started changing, however, so did most of the policies. Nowadays, the government has little to nothing to do with personal spending as long as no laws are violated. For some, that sounds like a nightmare. Others, in comparison, believe in limited power by the government and do not mind this approach.

Aaron Durall, however, thinks that both sides have a valid point. So, instead of arguing for either, he does his best to simply shed light on the matter.

Why should the government be involved?

One of the main reasons why the government should remain involved stems from people's inability to obtain health care. Prior to the tax-related penalties that Obama introduced, millions of people avoided insurance plans. That created a lot of obstacles whenever medical emergencies arose. In fact, families went bankrupt making attempts to cover previous expenses that came after their hospital treatments.

Why should the government stay out?

The opposite argument is that the government already has enough power. Being able to additionally make people buy insurance plans would overstep boundaries. Additionally, it would require everyone to spend money that they may not have. So, both sides of the debate are perfectly capable of creating sound analysis to support their stance.

Case-by-Case Basis

Mr. Durall ultimately believes that every situation should be approached on a case-by-case basis. For example, a person who lives and works here in Hollywood might be more open to requirements as they probably make enough money. Those living in lower-income areas, however, may not have such flexibility. Thus, the key to arriving at a mutual resolution is to start discussing the problem from a neutral perspective. Or, to look for a solution that would satisfy both sides while helping people obtain coverage.