Some states force their residents to pay for a broad insurance service often named "national insurance" or "social security"; it doesn't even matter if the subject has private insurance or not, or want the service or not --- the state would still require that money, often as "tax".

Is there a philosophical theory or school against forcing insurance of any kind by a state?

  • Night-watchman state
  • Right-libertarianism
  • Anarcho-capitalism
  • And what's communism's stance by the way?
  • See Welfare state Oct 28 '21 at 10:25
  • There is a difference between forcing people to buy insurance, and taxing them so that the government provides the service itself. Forcing people to buy insurance puts cash in the pockets of a profit-driven middleman. This can add additional costs, compared to the government providing the service through taxes.
    – causative
    Dec 1 '21 at 14:01

The state doesn’t force people primarily to have insurance, it forces people to avoid situations where they can’t look after themselves so they either become a burden to society, or to their friends and relatives, or they die.

So you are asking: Do people have the right to become a burden to society when this could be avoided?

Another kind of insurance is liability insurance. Most motorists have the ability to create damage that they cannot possibly pay for, which would leave some innocent victim damaged without any compensation. Do people have the right to act in a way that could be massively damaging to others, when this could easily be prevented?

If there are schools of philosophy that claim you should have these rights, then I don’t adhere to them.

  • I agree with liability insurance, but I disagree that the state prevents you to be a burden to society. Nov 1 '21 at 18:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.