|
|
|
|
|
by MichaelZuo
511 days ago
|
|
How does the concept of health insurance, risk pooling, etc., make sense if there are no lifetime maximums…? Eventually 100% of the population will need healthcare of some type. And without maximums to plan and set prices against, wouldn’t it just be a wealth transfer scheme from the relatively young and healthy to the particularly old and sick…? (With those in the middle roughly neutral) At least I can’t see any credible way to insure against something 100% of all possible customers will need. |
|
Health insurance is in many ways not even insurance, it's in many ways a price negotiation mechanism.
Anyway the whole system is overly complex, based off a tax credit from the 1950s, but the transition to a new scheme is nearly impossible while one political party is dead set against any improvement, especially if it might be perceived as a positive for the other political party, and also they have become so hyper partisan that they are not allowed to work with the other party in a bipartisan manner.