Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
Completely adequate until they get leukemia or cancer or Crohn's Disease and then the government has to pay for them because no health insurance company wants customers with chronic illness. My formerly healthy, non-smoking mother died of breast cancer at 35, Dell. If my father had not had health insurance through his job her death would have bankrupted us.
Yes, people who don't use insurance having insurance is what makes insurance work. That's why insurance companies don't want to insure people in flood zones and the government has to do it.
The problem is that we view health care as an insurance product at all. But as the defeat of Prop 45 showed, health insurance companies see great value in keeping the status quo as unchanged as possible, and they'll spend a lot of money to that end.
|
as for flood insurance....yeah, that's separate so that the majority of us who don't choose to live in flood zones don't have to help pay for those that do.
people like to compare health to other insurance, but it's really not comparable.
one can choose not to drive a car, or to not drive drunk, they can be good drivers so they get good rates.
health is a crap shoot for the most part. non smokers get lung cancer, people who eat well get diabetes, or crohns, or colon cancer, etc.
as long as health insurance is handled for profit, it's going to remain a mess.
when one is a bad driver with multiple violations, one has to buy high risk auto insurance which is costly. obviously health insurance can't be handled the same way.