• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Everybody get it through your thick heads, Health Insurance is different.

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
32,500
Reaction score
22,750
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Politicians, some posters on here, bloggers, various talking heads and so on like to argue that what is wrong with health insurance is that it doesn't work like other insurance you buy like car insurance or home owners. For example they talk about how automotive insurance doesn't pay for routine repairs or how home owners doesn't pay for the local handyman. They then use that to argue that health insurance is so expensive because we pay for most of our health care with it rather than just catastrophic care. The president even went so far as to think that health insurance should be as cheap for young people as whole life insurance (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/20/trump-thinks-young-people-pay-12-for-health-insurance.html). Evidently he is under the impression that health insurance should work like life insurance.

The problem with those types of arguments is that health insurance will never work like other types of insurance because it is by its very nature different.

For example: I buy a new car. I get liability insurance for it and collision / comprehensive insurance for it. I typically get 300,000 dollars worth of liability coverage for my vehicles. Thus my insurer is on the hook for a maximum of 300,000 dollars in the event I am fully at fault in an accident that injures others and or causes property damage. It it also on the hook for a maximum of the value of my car at the time of the accident. Every year the value of that car decreases, and thus the amount of money the insurer is on the hook for should I total it goes down as well. Chances are I will never make a claim while I own the vehicle as most people don't.

I own a home. My homeowners policy covers the cost to rebuild my home with an existing foundation and the cost of the contents of that home. That is stipulated in the policy. Thus if the cost to rebuild my home with an existing foundation and to replace all of its contents is 325,000 dollars, than that is the maximum my insurer is on the hook for. Chances are I will never make a claim while I own the home as most people don't.

If I buy life insurance, then the insurer is on the hook for the amount of money I pay for in my policy.

So if we made health insurance work like other forms of insurance, there would be a value to your life. The insurer would only pay for any healthcare up to the value of your life, at which point it would determine that you were a "total loss", and thus pay no more towards your care. Moreover, each year past your maximum productivity levels as a human being, the insurer would lower the maximum value of your life, and thus would pay less for your care. For example, a 30 year old would have a far higher life value than a 60 year old, much less an 80 year old. Finally, if you had any type of disability, then you would have a much lower life value, and thus the value of your life would be lower still. Also, the insurer would look at any lack of preventative maintenance you failed to do on your body, and lower your life value to them accordingly. For example, if health insurance worked like other forms of insurance and you needed a knee replacement, the insurer would not pay for it if you were obese as not maintaining a healthy weight would be the probable cause of your needing a knee replacement (kind of like how not keeping limbs trimmed off your house can be a way for an insurer to avoid paying if one of them falls on your house).

So that is how health insurance would work if we made it work like other forms of insurance. So even if you go to catastrophic only plans, which may well make financial sense for some people, particularly young healthy people, health insurance is still going to be very expensive because it doesn't work like any other form of insurance. Catastrophic care is very, very, very expensive, there is no theoretical limit to how expensive it can be, and thus insurers have to always price that risk into the policy. Moreover, unlike automotive or home owners insurance, everyone makes a health insurance claim at some point. Almost everyone will make a catastrophic claim at some point. Usually more than one. It would be like an insurer selling you homeowners and knowing that it will have to pay to rebuild the home at least once in the 30 years you own it, and quite possibly several times.

This is why some of the least expensive policies are the few true HMOs like Kaiser Permanente. The reason is that their members are usually with them for decades, thus it is financially beneficial for that insurer to make sure that their members get plenty of preventative care and screenings as the healthier they can keep them, the cheaper they will be to cover.

At any rate, health insurance is just completely different from any other type of insurance. It is so different, that we probably should just call it a health plan or something other than insurance.
 
Last edited:
The masters require healthy laborers, so you WILL go to the doctor regularly.

Compliance is mandatory.
 
Politicians, some posters on here, bloggers, various talking heads and so on like to argue that what is wrong with health insurance is that it doesn't work like other insurance you buy like car insurance or home owners. For example they talk about how automotive insurance doesn't pay for routine repairs or how home owners doesn't pay for the local handyman. They then use that to argue that health insurance is so expensive because we pay for most of our health care with it rather than just catastrophic care. The president even went so far as to think that health insurance should be as cheap for young people as whole life insurance (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/20/trump-thinks-young-people-pay-12-for-health-insurance.html). Evidently he is under the impression that health insurance should work like life insurance.

The problem with those types of arguments is that health insurance will never work like other types of insurance because it is by its very nature different.

For example: I buy a new car. I get liability insurance for it and collision / comprehensive insurance for it. I typically get 300,000 dollars worth of liability coverage for my vehicles. Thus my insurer is on the hook for a maximum of 300,000 dollars in the event I am fully at fault in an accident that injures others and or causes property damage. It it also on the hook for a maximum of the value of my car at the time of the accident. Every year the value of that car decreases, and thus the amount of money the insurer is on the hook for should I total it goes down as well. Chances are I will never make a claim while I own the vehicle as most people don't.

snip...

This is probably why many on the left simply call it "healthcare coverage" or "healthcare plan" instead of "health insurance".
 
The president even went so far as to think that health insurance should be as cheap for young people as whole life insurance (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/20/trump-thinks-young-people-pay-12-for-health-insurance.html).

Just to clarify on this post, I think you mean basic term insurance. Term insurance is cheap. A 20-year old can get $1 million in coverage for $10-50, however, term insurance is statistically created to not be paid out to the majority of policy holders. I believe only 1-2% of term insurance policies pay out.

That's why it's called "term" insurance. It always has a term and usually ends by the time you are 60-80 years old. When you reapply for term insurance at that age, the cost is typically x3, x4, or x5 the cost. Most companies don't offer large policies to people 70+ years old, even if they are healthy or have the money.

"Whole" life insurance is completely different. It is typically guaranteed to pay out but it is significantly more expensive. A $1 million Whole Life policy for even a 20-year old is going to cost $400+ a month. The advantage of Whole Life insurance is that is guaranteed that price for the rest of your life, and you do not have to worry about re-applying. Whole Life insurance is more like a quasi-investment as you can borrow money from your cash value. That's why a lot of businesses, business owners get it.

So Trump maybe confusing health insurance with term insurance however even if he is, term insurance is not designed to pay out for the majority of people that get it unless you are planning to commit suicide or fraud. Just think about it. $15 a month for a $1 million in coverage. The odds are not in your favor of getting it.
 
Last edited:
The masters require healthy laborers, so you WILL go to the doctor regularly.

Compliance is mandatory.

There is some truth in that....and probably for the same reason the military needs "a few good [healthy] men." In case of war...it would be difficult to recruit soldiers from a sick unhealthy population. Likewise, a healthy population means a healthy and literate labor force...and that attracts businesses which can bring in more revenue for the state. Perhaps that's why the government has a vested interest in public health and safety.
 
Politicians, some posters on here, bloggers, various talking heads and so on like to argue that what is wrong with health insurance is that it doesn't work like other insurance you buy like car insurance or home owners. For example they talk about how automotive insurance doesn't pay for routine repairs or how home owners doesn't pay for the local handyman. They then use that to argue that health insurance is so expensive because we pay for most of our health care with it rather than just catastrophic care. The president even went so far as to think that health insurance should be as cheap for young people .........
So if we made health insurance work like other forms of insurance, there would be a value to your life. The insurer would only pay for any healthcare up to the value of your life, at which point it would determine that you were a "total loss", and thus pay no more towards your care. Moreover, each year past your maximum productivity levels as a human being, the insurer would lower the maximum value of your life, and thus would pay less for your care. For example, a 30 year old would have a far higher life value than a 60 year old, much less an 80 year old. Finally, if you had any type of disability, then you would have a much lower life value, and thus the value of your life would be lower still. Also, the insurer would look at any lack of preventative maintenance you failed to do on your body, and lower your life value to them accordingly. For example, if health insurance worked like other forms of insurance and you needed a knee replacement, the insurer would not pay for it if you were obese as not maintaining a healthy weight would be the probable cause of your needing a knee replacement (kind of like how not keeping limbs trimmed off your house can be a way for an insurer to avoid paying if one of them falls on your house).

So that is how health insurance would work if we made it work like other forms of insurance. So even if you go to catastrophic only plans, which may well make financial sense for some people, particularly young healthy people, health insurance is still going to be very expensive because it doesn't work like any other form of insurance. Catastrophic care is very, very, very expensive, there is no theoretical limit to how expensive it can be, and thus insurers have to always price that risk into the policy. Moreover, unlike automotive or home owners insurance, everyone makes a health insurance claim at some point. Almost everyone will make a catastrophic claim at some point. Usually more than one. It would be like an insurer selling you homeowners and knowing that it will have to pay to rebuild the home at least once in the 30 years you own it, and quite possibly several times.

This is why some of the least expensive policies are the few true HMOs like Kaiser Permanente. The reason is that their members are usually with them for decades, thus it is financially beneficial for that insurer to make sure that their members get plenty of preventative care and screenings as the healthier they can keep them, the cheaper they will be to cover.

At any rate, health insurance is just completely different from any other type of insurance. It is so different, that we probably should just call it a health plan or something other than insurance.

The problem with the say home owner insurance is not that the insurance cannot conceive a policy that keeps your house in new condition. It even makes sense in some ways. The thing is, that most people would not want to pay for that kind of policy as it would be expensive.
Actually health insurance always has a cap on costs to keep you alive. Usually the cap works subtly and via a whole set of rules and regulations that no one really understands and the methods of rationing are different from policy to policy and from country to country. If they didn't in some way, then policies would be even more expensive, than they are today.
 
The problem with the say home owner insurance is not that the insurance cannot conceive a policy that keeps your house in new condition. It even makes sense in some ways. The thing is, that most people would not want to pay for that kind of policy as it would be expensive.
Actually health insurance always has a cap on costs to keep you alive. Usually the cap works subtly and via a whole set of rules and regulations that no one really understands and the methods of rationing are different from policy to policy and from country to country. If they didn't in some way, then policies would be even more expensive, than they are today.

Yes...I think it's called risk analysis...and insurance companies use it to price demographics that are high risk. Insuring risk is what insurance is all about...it's what they do. It's true, insurance companies put a a cap on costs..which is like putting a price on human life. Because the older you get...the more risk you become to insure to the point that private insurance companies won't or can't take the risk to insure you. Thank goodness for Medicare, eh?
 
Yes...I think it's called risk analysis...and insurance companies use it to price demographics that are high risk. Insuring risk is what insurance is all about...it's what they do. It's true, insurance companies put a a cap on costs..which is like putting a price on human life. Because the older you get...the more risk you become to insure to the point that private insurance companies won't or can't take the risk to insure you. Thank goodness for Medicare, eh?

I am insured privately under a German policy. The cap on the payments that they are obliged to make is much higher than that on the public insurances. In other words, I will receive much more and longer medical treatments than the publicly insured German would. This is most noticeable in medicines that a doctor may prescribe me and the availability of expensive doctors as well as the local availability of specialized and immediat services in non acute situations. The cap on public insurances are usually lower that those of private insurance in the countries I have seen.

As to preexisting conditions it is a question of the rules governing the insurance industry. It is the same as family policies. The rules can demand they be offered or not or must be in some specified form to be subsidized or not.
 
Just to clarify on this post, I think you mean basic term insurance. Term insurance is cheap. A 20-year old can get $1 million in coverage for $10-50, however, term insurance is statistically created to not be paid out to the majority of policy holders. I believe only 1-2% of term insurance policies pay out.

That's why it's called "term" insurance. It always has a term and usually ends by the time you are 60-80 years old. When you reapply for term insurance at that age, the cost is typically x3, x4, or x5 the cost. Most companies don't offer large policies to people 70+ years old, even if they are healthy or have the money.

"Whole" life insurance is completely different. It is typically guaranteed to pay out but it is significantly more expensive. A $1 million Whole Life policy for even a 20-year old is going to cost $400+ a month. The advantage of Whole Life insurance is that is guaranteed that price for the rest of your life, and you do not have to worry about re-applying. Whole Life insurance is more like a quasi-investment as you can borrow money from your cash value. That's why a lot of businesses, business owners get it.

So Trump maybe confusing health insurance with term insurance however even if he is, term insurance is not designed to pay out for the majority of people that get it unless you are planning to commit suicide or fraud. Just think about it. $15 a month for a $1 million in coverage. The odds are not in your favor of getting it.

Great example. Under Obamacare A 90 year old should theoretically be able to get that same million dollar coverage for the same price as a twenty year old. Obamacare is blind to the realities of medicine, markets, human nature, and the limits of government power.
 
The problem with the say home owner insurance is not that the insurance cannot conceive a policy that keeps your house in new condition. It even makes sense in some ways. The thing is, that most people would not want to pay for that kind of policy as it would be expensive.
Actually health insurance always has a cap on costs to keep you alive. Usually the cap works subtly and via a whole set of rules and regulations that no one really understands and the methods of rationing are different from policy to policy and from country to country. If they didn't in some way, then policies would be even more expensive, than they are today.
The ACA lifted the lifetime cap. When one has a big enough pool (that's why there is a mandate), lifting the cap that only a tiny segment will use causes no appreciable increase in premiums.
Great example. Under Obamacare A 90 year old should theoretically be able to get that same million dollar coverage for the same price as a twenty year old. Obamacare is blind to the realities of medicine, markets, human nature, and the limits of government power.
I don't know what "million dollar coverage" is. That sounds like life insurance not health insurance.

Under the ACA, there are Community Ratings, which guarantee that everyone in the insurance pool pays the same premium. That's why we have a mandate -- to make sure the pool isn't just sick people.
Otherwise, it doesn't make sense because old 90 year olds would have insurance they couldn't afford. People over 65 have Medicare as their primary insurance and buy everything else as supplementary.
 
Last edited:
The ACA lifted the lifetime cap. When one has a big enough pool (that's why there is a mandate), lifting the cap that only a tiny segment will use causes no appreciable increase in premiums.

I don't know what "million dollar coverage" is. That sounds like life insurance not health insurance.

Under the ACA, there are Community Ratings, which guarantee that everyone in the insurance pool pays the same premium. That's why we have a mandate -- to make sure the pool isn't just sick people.
Otherwise, it doesn't make sense because old 90 year olds would have insurance they couldn't afford. People over 65 have Medicare as their primary insurance and buy everything else as supplementary.

A life time cap on coverage is one way to construct rationing. Why is should be better than any other is not clear, unless it is a system that optimizes general welfare. My suspicion is that this doesn't, though, I don't think I've ever seen a study to determine the cost benefit or systems impact.
 
Back
Top Bottom