3 ms·
The problem with this analysis is (at least) two fold: 1. health care is a mixture of the predictable and the utterly unpredictable. It is vaccines, regular ex
by PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
The problem with this analysis is (at least) two fold:
1. health care is a mixture of the predictable and the utterly unpredictable. It is vaccines, regular exams, and minor trauma care. But it is also cancer, severe trauma, rare diseases.
2. insurance in its purest form is not a business but a way of pooling resources and distributing risk. Even in some countries with socialized health insurance, it is still called "insurance" for that very reason. We could get rid of every for-profit health insurance company in the USA tomorrow, and we'd still want something that is in every way just like "insurance" and would likely still be called that.
- Terr_ 2y ago> Even in some countries with socialized health insurance, it is still called "insurance" To add another data-point: In the US, the real name for the law behind "Social Security" is "Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance". That said, it is frequently mis-characterized in our political discourse, with people making apples-to-oranges comparisons to investment accounts. I blame that on bank lobbyists' attempts to take the money for themselves. Anyway, if one views it as "old and unable to support yourself" insurance, many of its "weird quirks" make perfect sense.