3 ms·
That's a good point, but I think it can still give a misguided view of what you would pay, depending on how many factors go into the discounts. They would have
by NateDad 13y ago
That's a good point, but I think it can still give a misguided view of what you would pay, depending on how many factors go into the discounts. They would have to ask you questions for every possible factor that could influence your healthcare costs. To be fair, I don't know what all the factors are, but if it's anything else like the government provides, there's probably a huge list of factors. I suppose that if 90% of it is income and number of people being covered, that's probably a decent starting point and would at least let people see approximately how much it costs.
- hga 13y agoThe really big one that cuts against this is the need for credit scores. Evidently that's a component of plan pricing, which makes sense because the price needs to reflect the probability the policy holder will pay all the way through the end of the year, adverse selection in jumping into and out of policies based on getting sick or major but not emergency procedures is a big problem with these sorts of scheme. And better verification will help keep rough credit score indications from leaking to others posing as you. But if the system disallows window shopping once IDed, e.g. plugging in different, by definition unverifiable income figures, family structures, etc., then the highest level thesis is supported.