I agree that that is a sane system, but it's not correct to call the payment an "insurance cost" if it is calculated according to means, not according to expect

I agree that that is a sane system, but it's not correct to call the payment an "insurance cost" if it is calculated according to means, not according to expected future treatment costs. That's what was causing the confusion and dissent. (Also … don't ask what US health insurance costs are based on. It's too horrible to contemplate. They're based on, among other things, your employer's negotiating power vis-à-vis the health insurance industry.)