Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You obviously are the one that has no clue how insurance works. It's risk pooling but that doesn't mean that everyone is lumped together. Take auto insurance for example.
Comparing something as cheap and simple as auto insurance that is truly a choice, compared to the complexities of health insurance that is a necessity seems a bit foolish.
You obviously are the one that has no clue how insurance works. It's risk pooling but that doesn't mean that everyone is lumped together. Take auto insurance for example. A company might have 4 or 5 policies for each state. You could be assigned to one or the other based on credit report, driving record, age, sex, etc. It could he called general, indemnity, or casualty and each with different rates. On top of that it can vary from state to state due to what that state requires. So your example is not true. A 18 year old male is not going to be lumped into the same policy as your 50 year old mom who never had a ticket. The young male will be lumped in with other similar risk individuals and in that particular state. Im the next state over, the rate could be double. So men and women, having different medical needs, could and should have different rates. No insurance company is one size fits all if it wants to stay in business and stay competitive.
We are not talking about car insurance. And I know exactly how health insurance works. This is my husbands field. If an 18 year old doesn't have health insurance and all of a sudden they have to be treated for cancer.....we pay for it. If an 18 year old who doesn't have health insurance gets hits by a car and goes to the ER....we pay for it. People who don't have insurance drives the cost up for all of us. What don't you understand about this.
Okay so what's wrong with men and women having different policies that cater to their specific needs? I don't understand your point.
We kind of do already. So when insurance companies calculate premiums it is all based on statistics/probability etc.
A 35 year old man who buys health insurance doesn't pay what a 55 year old man does - why? Because statistically their insurance claims are different.
Kind of like car insurance -- a 20 year old man pays more than a 55 year old man.
I think when you add the option of checking off boxes you will add more cost to administer the insurance -- and i don't think it will shift costs significantly.
Also -- you end up with a bunch of people opting out of some of the critical stuff to save money and end up being back where we started -- people incurring medical expenses they can never pay and that bad debt being included as overhead and added to all our costs.
What do the insurance companies say?
Not much - -because they will adjust and make sure whatever we do -- they will make the same profit.
Interestingly -- these men that were saying men shouldn't pay for this or that -- they have a health care plan that doesn't give them that option and they are quite happy with their health care plan.
You obviously are the one that has no clue how insurance works. It's risk pooling but that doesn't mean that everyone is lumped together. Take auto insurance for example. A company might have 4 or 5 policies for each state. You could be assigned to one or the other based on credit report, driving record, age, sex, etc. It could he called general, indemnity, or casualty and each with different rates. On top of that it can vary from state to state due to what that state requires. So your example is not true. A 18 year old male is not going to be lumped into the same policy as your 50 year old mom who never had a ticket. The young male will be lumped in with other similar risk individuals and in that particular state. Im the next state over, the rate could be double. So men and women, having different medical needs, could and should have different rates. No insurance company is one size fits all if it wants to stay in business and stay competitive.
This hot mess shows a misunderstanding of insurance altogether.
Okay so what's wrong with men and women having different policies that cater to their specific needs? I don't understand your point.
Because as a man I'd feel moral guilt knowing a woman has to pay more for health insurance simply because she's a woman. Women already make less than men in the workforce so I'm not all that thrilled with the idea of forcing them to pay more for insurance.
We are not talking about car insurance. And I know exactly how health insurance works. This is my husbands field. If an 18 year old doesn't have health insurance and all of a sudden they have to be treated for cancer.....we pay for it. If an 18 year old who doesn't have health insurance gets hits by a car and goes to the ER....we pay for it. People who don't have insurance drives the cost up for all of us. What don't you understand about this.
You can't reason with the self-serving and irrational types, just ignore them.
Comparing something as cheap and simple as auto insurance that is truly a choice, compared to the complexities of health insurance that is a necessity seems a bit foolish.
You know nothing about insurance. It's the same principal regardless of product. You lump various groups together based on statistical criteria. That's how you develop competitive rates. Also health insurance is not a necessity. No hospital in the country can refuse treatment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.