Healthcare: Universal Coverage, Mandates, and Wages

A rant in Boston's Weekly Dig lays out why the healthcare problem is a wage problem:

Dearest Governor/ Presidential Candidate/ Botox Abuser,

Thanks for leaving us with the mandatory health insurance law. I really appreciate being told that I'm legally obligated to have health insurance by January 1st (which I don't), and pay $196/month (which I can't afford), or be subject to a $219 yearly penalty (which will soon be $912). To repeat: I can't afford to spend $196/month for health insurance, so somehow I can afford $912 for the year for nothing???

So basically, because of your landmark law, I can now look forward to bussing tables at Applebee's, or whatever mid-level chain restaurant I'll be forced to work at for a second job.

Don't get me wrong, it's every kid's dream to work away their 20s, just to eat ramen, drink Pabst, and pay rent for a two bedroom in the student ghetto (Allston). Thereby joining the growing list of postgrads who are too old to live this way. But hey, it could be worse: I could be living in a state where laws proposed to help the less fortunate are actually thinly veiled corporate expense cuts. Oh wait; I DO!

Whether it's healthcare per se, or preventative healthcare (e.g., eating healthy, exercising), the healthcare crisis is, in large part, an income problem: people can't afford it.