23 ms·

This sentence worries me: > The United States health insurance system works better for costs that are spread out and predictable. So the insurance companies w

by jzwinck 12y ago

This sentence worries me: > The United States health insurance system works better for costs that are spread out and predictable. So the insurance companies want to reduce their tail-event risk. It's almost like they should buy some insurance. And they can do exactly that--it's called reinsurance. The entire point of insurance from an individual's perspective should be to cover unexpected costs. Big costs, not small ones we can pay out of pocket. But it seems that over time, people have come to rely on their employer-sponsored plans to protect them from routine expenses like dental cleanings, eyeglasses, etc. That's not insurance--that's paying a premium to a middleman to manage your bills for you. Insurance ought to be designed specifically for this sort of treatment: expensive, unexpected, and important.

vertex-four 12y ago
> that's paying a premium to a middleman to manage your bills for you. The thing is, under the current system, it's not even that; it's some sort of complex mixture of insurance and collective bargaining. The "insurance" companies pay decidedly less than the rate you'd be asked to pay if you got any of these treatments, checkups, or whatever else, yourself. Therefore, it's only logical that you get your insurance company to pay for you. I've run over this a few times in my head, and there doesn't really seem to be a feasible way to split up companies between "usual" and "unusual" treatments - collective bargaining groups vs insurance - in a fair way, and definitely not one that works out cheaper.
rthomas6 12y ago
Yes yes yes. I could rant forever about this-- it seems like nobody gets why this is bad. It's like everyone forgot what insurance is supposed to be for. You don't get your brakes fixed with car insurance. You don't re-shingle your house with homeowner's insurance. Why would you get vaccines or routine care with health insurance? The fact that health insurance works like this is doubly bad, because not only does it raise the cost of health insurance, it also raises the cost of healthcare itself because consumers are no longer price sensitive at all. If healthcare consumers at large (that actually have money) were exposed to the price of healthcare, hospitals and doctors offices would be forced to compete on price for more routine procedures. Think about how even complex elective procedures like Lasik or Lipo-suction are comparatively cheap. That's because the providers must compete on price. This could be the case for routine care if healthcare consumers could be exposed to price.

by jzwinck 12y ago

vertex-four 12y ago

> that's paying a premium to a middleman to manage your bills for you. The thing is, under the current system, it's not even that; it's some sort of complex mixture of insurance and collective bargaining. The "insurance" companies pay decidedly less than the rate you'd be asked to pay if you got any of these treatments, checkups, or whatever else, yourself. Therefore, it's only logical that you get your insurance company to pay for you. I've run over this a few times in my head, and there doesn't really seem to be a feasible way to split up companies between "usual" and "unusual" treatments - collective bargaining groups vs insurance - in a fair way, and definitely not one that works out cheaper.

rthomas6 12y ago

Yes yes yes. I could rant forever about this-- it seems like nobody gets why this is bad. It's like everyone forgot what insurance is supposed to be for. You don't get your brakes fixed with car insurance. You don't re-shingle your house with homeowner's insurance. Why would you get vaccines or routine care with health insurance? The fact that health insurance works like this is doubly bad, because not only does it raise the cost of health insurance, it also raises the cost of healthcare itself because consumers are no longer price sensitive at all. If healthcare consumers at large (that actually have money) were exposed to the price of healthcare, hospitals and doctors offices would be forced to compete on price for more routine procedures. Think about how even complex elective procedures like Lasik or Lipo-suction are comparatively cheap. That's because the providers must compete on price. This could be the case for routine care if healthcare consumers could be exposed to price.