If you can't calculate the risk, that means you're more likely to buy the insurance. You might only use 200 dollars of insurance, or you might need a 50k claim. If you can calculate the risk, you can make a fairly educated guess that your expected expenditures will be less than the total premiums.
That's kind of opposite, though, unless we're approaching this from a different point to the same end. I remain with health insurance because I can caluclate the risk - I'm fairly sure I'll be using it and that I'll need it for something pricey. I don't, say, have insurance on my cell phone because I can't really figure out if I'll really need it. I can't calculate real risk on it.
Like I said, the gap is creating a significant problem. By being uninsured, she has an entire host of problems that will never be insured. It doesn't matter that she has health insurance, she will have to pay out of pocket for that malady for the rest of her life.
...assuming the insurance won't cover it, and no other insurance will cover it, and that the gap is at fault, etc. There's a lot of variables I feel like you're glossing over.
These gaps follow us into our next phase of life as an insured person. And that's a problem. I don't understand why you can't see that.
Because it appears, to me, that it's one of those overstated problems that a) is, well, overstated and b) is created in part by how we've created "solutions" to the problem. Why have we created a regulatory system, for instance, that makes dropping people from insurance more sane than paying out?
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: No such things as a free organ transplant
Date: 14/12/10 00:21 (UTC)That's kind of opposite, though, unless we're approaching this from a different point to the same end. I remain with health insurance because I can caluclate the risk - I'm fairly sure I'll be using it and that I'll need it for something pricey. I don't, say, have insurance on my cell phone because I can't really figure out if I'll really need it. I can't calculate real risk on it.
Like I said, the gap is creating a significant problem. By being uninsured, she has an entire host of problems that will never be insured. It doesn't matter that she has health insurance, she will have to pay out of pocket for that malady for the rest of her life.
...assuming the insurance won't cover it, and no other insurance will cover it, and that the gap is at fault, etc. There's a lot of variables I feel like you're glossing over.
These gaps follow us into our next phase of life as an insured person. And that's a problem. I don't understand why you can't see that.
Because it appears, to me, that it's one of those overstated problems that a) is, well, overstated and b) is created in part by how we've created "solutions" to the problem. Why have we created a regulatory system, for instance, that makes dropping people from insurance more sane than paying out?