4 ms·

>but as someone who was rationally uninsured It's not rational for anyone to be uninsured. Any healthy person could get in an accident.

by bluthru 12y ago

sp332 12y ago
And we should all play the lottery because we might win? If the expected value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value is lower than the cost, then you rationally shouldn't buy it.
- defen 12y ago
  The utility of money is non-linear though. It can be worthwhile to pay a small amount of money in order to prevent a non-zero probability of losing a large amount of money, even if the expected value in terms of dollars is negative.
- pranjalv123 12y ago
  The expected value of insurance is always lower than the cost, that's why someone sells it. The reason you buy insurance is to protect against catastrophic events, which are impossible to predict on an individual basis.
- 01Michael10 12y ago
  No... Hey, if you don't want to buy health insurance fine but... Don't show up at a hospital when you are sick or hurt to drive up the cost for everyone else. Deal? Personally, I am single payer type person. Cut the middle man insurance companies right out of the equation. EDIT: Why is my comment being downvoted?
  - sp332 12y ago
    Single payer probably looks good on paper, but I would never trust someone with that much money and power.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      The US spends more, not only per capita but as a share of GDP, public funds on healthcare than some OECD countries that have single payer with generally similar outcomes. So you (in the general sense) are already trusting the government with (or at least, not preventing the government from spending, whether you trust them or not) the money to provide single payer -- you are just doing it in a system which requires an even greater amount in private expenditures on top of those public expenditures to provide a similar overall quality of care.
    - bluthru 12y ago
      >Single payer probably looks good on paper And in the many first world countries that have used it for decades. It's a proven model. >I would never trust someone with that much money and power. That's how they're able to negotiate better rates.

>but as someone who was rationally uninsured It's not rational for anyone to be uninsured. Any healthy person could get in an accident.

by bluthru 12y ago

>but as someone who was rationally uninsured It's not rational for anyone to be uninsured. Any healthy person could get in an accident.

sp332 12y ago

And we should all play the lottery because we might win? If the expected value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value is lower than the cost, then you rationally shouldn't buy it.

defen 12y ago
The utility of money is non-linear though. It can be worthwhile to pay a small amount of money in order to prevent a non-zero probability of losing a large amount of money, even if the expected value in terms of dollars is negative.
pranjalv123 12y ago
The expected value of insurance is always lower than the cost, that's why someone sells it. The reason you buy insurance is to protect against catastrophic events, which are impossible to predict on an individual basis.
01Michael10 12y ago
No... Hey, if you don't want to buy health insurance fine but... Don't show up at a hospital when you are sick or hurt to drive up the cost for everyone else. Deal? Personally, I am single payer type person. Cut the middle man insurance companies right out of the equation. EDIT: Why is my comment being downvoted?
- sp332 12y ago
  Single payer probably looks good on paper, but I would never trust someone with that much money and power.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    The US spends more, not only per capita but as a share of GDP, public funds on healthcare than some OECD countries that have single payer with generally similar outcomes. So you (in the general sense) are already trusting the government with (or at least, not preventing the government from spending, whether you trust them or not) the money to provide single payer -- you are just doing it in a system which requires an even greater amount in private expenditures on top of those public expenditures to provide a similar overall quality of care.
  - bluthru 12y ago
    >Single payer probably looks good on paper And in the many first world countries that have used it for decades. It's a proven model. >I would never trust someone with that much money and power. That's how they're able to negotiate better rates.