4 ms·

I mostly agree but there are a lot of caveats here. Health insurance is the biggest one, of course. ACA is better than nothing but it's not great. The other th

by zrail 6y ago

I mostly agree but there are a lot of caveats here. Health insurance is the biggest one, of course. ACA is better than nothing but it's not great. The other that comes to mind is life insurance. Some people can't buy individual life insurance at any price due to preexisting conditions but they can get a group policy from their employer (up to certain limits) with no questions asked.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> I mostly agree but there are a lot of caveats here. Health insurance is the biggest one, of course. ACA is better than nothing but it's not great. It would be better than employer-provided insurance, especially if people weren't being discouraged to buy high deductible plans, because it would cause patients to be price-sensitive for routine non-emergency care, which would bring down overall costs in a major way. (Which is why the ACA doesn't do that -- the industry doesn't want lower costs, because that's their revenue.) > Some people can't buy individual life insurance at any price due to preexisting conditions but they can get a group policy from their employer (up to certain limits) with no questions asked. I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a good thing that people can force other people to subsidize their life insurance after the risk of early payout is already known. It's like letting someone's family buy life insurance after they've already died. That's not insurance, it's charity. Insurance is what you get if you bought it before the risk came to light.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dgoldstein0 6y ago
  I'm having a hard time parsing that bit about health insurance - "it would be better" - what is "it"? - "it would cause patients" -again, what is"it" referencing?
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    Getting rid of employer-provided insurance and just giving people the money so they can buy health insurance themselves.
- zrail 6y ago
  > I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a good thing that people can force other people to subsidize their life insurance after the risk of early payout is already known. It's like letting someone's family buy life insurance after they've already died. That's not insurance, it's charity. Insurance is what you get if you bought it before the risk came to light. This is one of the most callous and uncaring things I’ve ever read on this terrible website. Congratulations.

by zrail 6y ago

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> I mostly agree but there are a lot of caveats here. Health insurance is the biggest one, of course. ACA is better than nothing but it's not great. It would be better than employer-provided insurance, especially if people weren't being discouraged to buy high deductible plans, because it would cause patients to be price-sensitive for routine non-emergency care, which would bring down overall costs in a major way. (Which is why the ACA doesn't do that -- the industry doesn't want lower costs, because that's their revenue.) > Some people can't buy individual life insurance at any price due to preexisting conditions but they can get a group policy from their employer (up to certain limits) with no questions asked. I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a good thing that people can force other people to subsidize their life insurance after the risk of early payout is already known. It's like letting someone's family buy life insurance after they've already died. That's not insurance, it's charity. Insurance is what you get if you bought it before the risk came to light.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dgoldstein0 6y ago
I'm having a hard time parsing that bit about health insurance - "it would be better" - what is "it"? - "it would cause patients" -again, what is"it" referencing?
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  Getting rid of employer-provided insurance and just giving people the money so they can buy health insurance themselves.
zrail 6y ago
> I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a good thing that people can force other people to subsidize their life insurance after the risk of early payout is already known. It's like letting someone's family buy life insurance after they've already died. That's not insurance, it's charity. Insurance is what you get if you bought it before the risk came to light. This is one of the most callous and uncaring things I’ve ever read on this terrible website. Congratulations.