5 ms·

Yes, that is correct, rates are considerably cheaper per person in a group. But crucially, if you have preexisting conditions you can actually get covered. Insu

Yes, that is correct, rates are considerably cheaper per person in a group. But crucially, if you have preexisting conditions you can actually get covered. Insurance companies won't insure people with many preexisting conditions, and when they will insure them the rates can be completely impossible to swing. So let's say you have a stable job with insurance but you have diabetes, or perhaps you are a cancer survivor. If you switch to this job, you will have no insurance and you will not be able to get any. Or consider that you are unemployed. Now you might have state Medicaid insurance. Taking this job means you lose it AND you can't get insurance since they don't offer it. Or something less serious. A developer who is pregnant for example is basically uninsurable as an individual except also by state Medicaid, which is available to the poor in the US. What if you have AIDS taking long term drug therapy, or you are a paraplegic developer? You will not be insurable as an individual. A disabled developer, or a pregnant one would not be able to take this job with no benefits. In some cases this sort of no insurance policy can work well as a way of screening out candidates that some software companies may consider undesirable, including women of child bearing age, the disabled, and other groups.

mey 15y ago
In theory this will improve in 2014, as long as Congress doesn't make another radical course shift (so yeah...) http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2011/01/preexisting.html http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2011/01/preexisting.html
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
anamax 15y ago
> Insurance companies won't insure people with many preexisting conditions, and when they will insure them the rates can be completely impossible to swing. Yes they will IF you don't let your coverage lapse. How many people don't know about their preexisting conditions? If their preexisting conditions are serious, why are they letting their coverage lapse? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_an...
- neild 15y ago
  How many people don't know about their preexisting conditions? If their preexisting conditions are serious, why are they letting their coverage lapse? If you look up the cost of individual medical coverage and the amount of money provided by unemployment insurance, you may find yourself with the answer to that question.
  - anamax 15y ago
    > If you look up the cost of individual medical coverage and the amount of money provided by unemployment insurance. I've not only looked up the cost, I've paid it while being unemployed (and "old"). What's your relevant experience? Yes, it cost money, but so does housing and other essentials. My "not healthcare" expenses are very low and yet healthcare wasn't what would push me over the edge. I didn't even bother to shop.
    - eli 15y ago
      If you have a serious pre-existing condition, it's unlikely that any insurer will offer you coverage at any price, unless they are obligated to. I had a good friend with a relatively minor pre-existing condition get flat-out denied for coverage
- tptacek 15y ago
  We've just recently had this discussion (you & I), and I'm reasonably sure that this is not in fact universally true: that there are plenty of places where continuous group coverage does not translate to insurability on the private market.
  - anamax 15y ago
    > I'm reasonably sure that this is not in fact universally true: that there are plenty of places I know that you believe that, which is why I posted a link to a description of some relevant (US) federal legislation. (I know that there is other relevant legislation but ....) As I mentioned, I've paid for individual coverage out of pocket while unemployed (and old). My experience does not match the common stories and I'm pretty sure that I'm not a special snowflake.
orangecat 15y ago
So let's say you have a stable job with insurance but you have diabetes, or perhaps you are a cancer survivor. If you switch to this job, you will have no insurance and you will not be able to get any. Yes, which is one of many reasons why employer-provided insurance is a horrible system. If individual policies were the norm, most people with expensive chronic conditions would have been covered before developing those conditions, and then wouldn't be trapped in their jobs or completely screwed if they were laid off.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

mey 15y ago

In theory this will improve in 2014, as long as Congress doesn't make another radical course shift (so yeah...) http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2011/01/preexisting.html http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2011/01/preexisting.html

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

anamax 15y ago

> Insurance companies won't insure people with many preexisting conditions, and when they will insure them the rates can be completely impossible to swing. Yes they will IF you don't let your coverage lapse. How many people don't know about their preexisting conditions? If their preexisting conditions are serious, why are they letting their coverage lapse? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_an...

neild 15y ago
How many people don't know about their preexisting conditions? If their preexisting conditions are serious, why are they letting their coverage lapse? If you look up the cost of individual medical coverage and the amount of money provided by unemployment insurance, you may find yourself with the answer to that question.
- anamax 15y ago
  > If you look up the cost of individual medical coverage and the amount of money provided by unemployment insurance. I've not only looked up the cost, I've paid it while being unemployed (and "old"). What's your relevant experience? Yes, it cost money, but so does housing and other essentials. My "not healthcare" expenses are very low and yet healthcare wasn't what would push me over the edge. I didn't even bother to shop.
  - eli 15y ago
    If you have a serious pre-existing condition, it's unlikely that any insurer will offer you coverage at any price, unless they are obligated to. I had a good friend with a relatively minor pre-existing condition get flat-out denied for coverage
tptacek 15y ago
We've just recently had this discussion (you & I), and I'm reasonably sure that this is not in fact universally true: that there are plenty of places where continuous group coverage does not translate to insurability on the private market.
- anamax 15y ago
  > I'm reasonably sure that this is not in fact universally true: that there are plenty of places I know that you believe that, which is why I posted a link to a description of some relevant (US) federal legislation. (I know that there is other relevant legislation but ....) As I mentioned, I've paid for individual coverage out of pocket while unemployed (and old). My experience does not match the common stories and I'm pretty sure that I'm not a special snowflake.

orangecat 15y ago

So let's say you have a stable job with insurance but you have diabetes, or perhaps you are a cancer survivor. If you switch to this job, you will have no insurance and you will not be able to get any. Yes, which is one of many reasons why employer-provided insurance is a horrible system. If individual policies were the norm, most people with expensive chronic conditions would have been covered before developing those conditions, and then wouldn't be trapped in their jobs or completely screwed if they were laid off.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]