3 ms·

Aaah Insurance strikes again. Insurance is a scam that somehow as a society we have allowed to normalize in our society. The Insurance system just doesn't mak

Aaah Insurance strikes again. Insurance is a scam that somehow as a society we have allowed to normalize in our society. The Insurance system just doesn't make sense, that's why we see so many problems with car, health, death and other types of insurance. The problem lies in that both parties have misaligned and often oposite objectives: The Insurer's main goal is to maximize their profit, and the levers it has is to avoid paying the insured as much as possible. That's why we have so many denied payments and abuse in the case of health insurance. Moreover, given that every insurance claim is a single case for the Insurer, they have the upper hand and oftentimes there is no recourse for the insured to really fight an unjust insurance denial. We must find an alternative for this terrible system...

ademup 5y ago
I couldn't agree more. Anecdote: I have been waiting for 2 weeks for insurance to "approve" an angiogram + interventiin that two cardiologists agree that I need immediately. I am a single 43yo male on a $1,000\mo insurance plan.("reduced" to "only" $550\mo by coverer california). If I ever manage to get powerful and\or wealthy, I will task myself with fighting the scourge that is the insurance cabals tooth and nail.
- KirillPanov 5y ago
  The sad part is that when you become wealthy, you realize that you can just ignore the whole insurance scam [*] and not buy it. Insurance has negative expected value. It only makes sense to insure against events that would materially change your lifestyle. At a certain degree of wealth, your house burning down no longer has that effect, nor does just about anything other than lawsuits or medical problems. Even health insurance typically has lifetime maximums in the single-digit millions. So don't look to the wealthy to fix this one. They don't have this problem. [*] except health insurance [**] and vehicular liability insurance where required by law in places that do not allow posting a cash bond instead (almost every state in the US does). [**] unless you're wealthy enough to make large donations to hospitals, which is much better than having health insurance.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Even health insurance typically has lifetime maximums The ACA, in the US, prohibited lifetime and annual maximums except those that apply only to services not defined as essential health benefits, with the exception of pre-existing grandfathered-in individual (not group) plans.
ErikVandeWater 5y ago
The problem is the court system is too inefficient and expensive so you can't reasonably sue any company who does you wrong without having an 8 figure + bank account.
maxerickson 5y ago
Car insurance isn't really that bad. It's often moderately expensive, because cars are expensive and we drive a lot. Michigan, in a big populist maneuver, got rid of requirements for unlimited personal injury protection (with lifetime medical payments). Drivers are happy, as the risk they take when they hit the road has been transferred to Medicaid. It's not quite the libertarian victory the Republicans that back it are claiming, shifting from a required user fee to a public payor of last resort. (It's more consistent for Democrats, moving a cost that disproportionately impacts lower income people to a public funding model)
rswail 5y ago
You are confusing health "insurance" (which is not insurance as such) versus things like life insurance and property insurance. The US health economy is flawed in many ways that have been discussed endlessly. On the other hand, more usual insurances are actuarial and work on the basis that an insurer shares the risk across the people/property that is insured and charges appropriately. Most insurance of that nature make their profits from investing the income, relying on their actuaries to calculate the expected losses due to claims.

ademup 5y ago

I couldn't agree more. Anecdote: I have been waiting for 2 weeks for insurance to "approve" an angiogram + interventiin that two cardiologists agree that I need immediately. I am a single 43yo male on a $1,000\mo insurance plan.("reduced" to "only" $550\mo by coverer california). If I ever manage to get powerful and\or wealthy, I will task myself with fighting the scourge that is the insurance cabals tooth and nail.

KirillPanov 5y ago
The sad part is that when you become wealthy, you realize that you can just ignore the whole insurance scam [*] and not buy it. Insurance has negative expected value. It only makes sense to insure against events that would materially change your lifestyle. At a certain degree of wealth, your house burning down no longer has that effect, nor does just about anything other than lawsuits or medical problems. Even health insurance typically has lifetime maximums in the single-digit millions. So don't look to the wealthy to fix this one. They don't have this problem. [*] except health insurance [**] and vehicular liability insurance where required by law in places that do not allow posting a cash bond instead (almost every state in the US does). [**] unless you're wealthy enough to make large donations to hospitals, which is much better than having health insurance.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Even health insurance typically has lifetime maximums The ACA, in the US, prohibited lifetime and annual maximums except those that apply only to services not defined as essential health benefits, with the exception of pre-existing grandfathered-in individual (not group) plans.

ErikVandeWater 5y ago

The problem is the court system is too inefficient and expensive so you can't reasonably sue any company who does you wrong without having an 8 figure + bank account.

maxerickson 5y ago

Car insurance isn't really that bad. It's often moderately expensive, because cars are expensive and we drive a lot. Michigan, in a big populist maneuver, got rid of requirements for unlimited personal injury protection (with lifetime medical payments). Drivers are happy, as the risk they take when they hit the road has been transferred to Medicaid. It's not quite the libertarian victory the Republicans that back it are claiming, shifting from a required user fee to a public payor of last resort. (It's more consistent for Democrats, moving a cost that disproportionately impacts lower income people to a public funding model)

rswail 5y ago

You are confusing health "insurance" (which is not insurance as such) versus things like life insurance and property insurance. The US health economy is flawed in many ways that have been discussed endlessly. On the other hand, more usual insurances are actuarial and work on the basis that an insurer shares the risk across the people/property that is insured and charges appropriately. Most insurance of that nature make their profits from investing the income, relying on their actuaries to calculate the expected losses due to claims.