|
|
|
|
|
by _delirium
5300 days ago
|
|
More or less because reasonably-priced health insurance requires a risk pool in which membership isn't voluntary, and large companies provide such a pool by requiring that all their employees enroll in the company health insurance as a condition of employment (and pay their portion of the coverage fee with no opt-out allowed). The insurers assume that the number of people who'll turn down the job solely due to disagreeing with the mandatory-insurance aspect is small, so the coverage pool is in effect a large, mandatory-coverage pool selected for mostly-health-unrelated reasons, which is the kind that works as a risk pool. Entrepreneurs don't have anything similar unless there is a way to aggregate themselves into a pool where the opt-ins don't correlate with health condition too strongly, which currently there isn't. Insurers for good reason don't give good terms to non-mandatory-coverage risk pools, because of the strong bias towards high-risk people in such pools. And good luck if you have any congenital health issues; my friend who has a from-birth heart defect is essentially banned from ever doing a startup due to the employment-tied nature of the U.S. healthcare system and the preexisting-condition rules that make the health-insurance-via-corporate-job approach the only one open to him. |
|
So I fail to see a legit statistical/risk-model reason why health insurers MUST gouge small companies/entrepreneurs.
I think it's mostly due to small companies having less negotiating leverage.