Some thoughts on health insurance, it’s about CONTROL fundamentally, not health

Don’t worry the behavioral economists are on it.

There is a solution to the health insurance issue. It’s fairly ovious. As a former insurance underwriter I am very familiar with it. Catastrophic insurance.

Most people don’t need “well visits” or if they do $50 for a visit a year seems pretty reasonable to me. But people do need coverage in the event of something like cancer or a car crash. Such policies can likely be underwritten profitably and people can likely be covered at a very reasonable cost as catastrophic losses are usually far and few between. (Thankfully.)

We shouldn’t cover birth control, viagra, sex changes, flu visits, vaccines, etc. And if one has created one’s health issues – diabetes (often) taxpayers shouldn’t be covering the cost of treatment for that either. (Of course understanding that none of us is perfect including yours truly on the behavioral disease front. I am an American after all.)

The health care debate really isn’t about health care at the deepest base level. If it was we’d open up the insurance markets. No, it is about CONTROL and the perception that some people get better health coverage than others. It’s about the behavioral economists – people who think they know much more than they do – telling people who don’t know better what to do. Backed of course with the force of law.

You have 0 items in your cart. Proceed to checkout?
Yes, please!