Crazy Idea - Insurers Offer Insurance to the Uninsured That Actually Meets Their Needs
On page one of the Personal Journal section, the WSJ has an article illuminating who many of the "uninsured" are that we hear so much about in dread tones. Of course, I have said this before - the "uninsured" is largely a mythical beast used to drum up ire over our healthcare system. Over 30% of the uninsured make over $50,000 and simply choose not to have insurance. I know that when I was in my late twenties, I passed on paying the $300 or so per month for health insurance in order to have more money in my pocket to frequent NYC's many fine public houses and to appropriately woo the future Mrs. Baseball. Sure enough, the WSJ article notes that a big portion of the uninsured are young people in their twenties and thirties.
(More on the "uninsured" here.) The article talks about how insurance companies are targeting this young demographic with policies that actually are relevant to them. Think about it, the medical risks faced by a 27 year-old are much different than a 42 year old faces. The latter individual is much more likely to need prostate cancer treatment or a hernia operation or a triple bypass than the former individual. Likewise the 27 year old is probably more likely to have a major sports injury. These two people need different policies to cater to their specific risks, but employer-paid insurance treats these two individuals largely the same. The development that the WSJ article chronicles is a welcome development and illustrates how market forces and the power of competition can make the right policy available to the right individual. There are still barriers though, and we need a federal market for health insurance so that this market can work around some of the barriers that restrictive state laws throw up.
(More on the "uninsured" here.) The article talks about how insurance companies are targeting this young demographic with policies that actually are relevant to them. Think about it, the medical risks faced by a 27 year-old are much different than a 42 year old faces. The latter individual is much more likely to need prostate cancer treatment or a hernia operation or a triple bypass than the former individual. Likewise the 27 year old is probably more likely to have a major sports injury. These two people need different policies to cater to their specific risks, but employer-paid insurance treats these two individuals largely the same. The development that the WSJ article chronicles is a welcome development and illustrates how market forces and the power of competition can make the right policy available to the right individual. There are still barriers though, and we need a federal market for health insurance so that this market can work around some of the barriers that restrictive state laws throw up.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home