| Yes... "One of the less obvious consequences of serious accidents is that victims often become uninsurable on the individual market as a result.... Obamacare really will change that." Making this sort of insurance available amounts to a wealth transfer to people who have been victims of injuries. That's fine, if you're into wealth transfers and all that, but... wouldn't it be better if we just admitted it was a big fat subsidy to the sick and injured, and paid for it out of the general fund, instead of paying for it by making insurance more expensive, especially the young healthy twenty-somethings who struggle to afford it? so that these twenty-somethings wouldn't be tempted to skip it, among other things, and would be less vulnerable to these $200,000+ risks (and further undermine the system)? I mean, all else being equal, it is probably a good idea to be insured if you can, Obamacare notwithstanding, but the fact that it incentives people this way is a fundamental design flaw, not a feature or a fix. Oh, wait, I know why we're paying for it this way. It's so we can pretend that it doesn't cost anybody any money. :P |