Free the Big Deductible

American Thinker ^ | 03/09/2017 | C. Edmund Wright

[SeekAndFind]

There is a near ubiquitous misunderstanding of the function of a deductible in insurance, and it is crippling our national debate on health care. A lot of people in positions of power don’t even know what insurance actually is in the first place, and the fear of the big deductible is a major element of this general confusion. Do not fear the big D. Embrace it.

Now why do I advocate for large deductibles? Easy, and it’s not because I’m some fat cat insurance CEO -- because I’m not. For years, I have criticized the abuse of large deductibles in the political discussion of health care, not to mention both the regulation and practice of health care under ObamaCare by bureaucrats and insurance companies alike. We have no argument there. In fact, all this inefficiency and corruption perverts the way a big deductible works in a freer market.

No, the reason I like them is that large deductibles are how the risk management industry can control premium costs, and by reducing paperwork, can reduce marginally the cost of the health care services itself. But this only happens in a somewhat free market. We must free the big deductible for it to work its magic.

How? It’s pretty easy really. There are several components that take money out of our pockets related to our health care, and they include our premium costs, our deductible and coinsurance costs, and any cash for goods or services we pay for items not covered under insurance.

Of those, the only cost we are guaranteed to incur in a year’s time is the premium. Some will say but wait, I don’t pay my premium, my employer does. Uh, no. I hate to break it to you, but your employer only collects your insurance premium,

[TADSLOS]

Amen. The constitution reserves all of this to the states and the PEOPLE! They shouldn’t even be discussing it at the federal level other than to REPEAL it immediately and REMOVE any and all federal roadblocks to free markets. If the GOP passes any kind of national healthcare plan and it’s not shot down immediately by the SCOTUS as unconstitutional, then we’ll be saddled with cradle to grave socialist healthcare as an “entitlement” forever (or until we go bust).

THANK YOU FOR CLARITY AND TRUTH!!

[itsahoot]

If car insurance worked like health insurance, it would cover oil changes, they would bill $800, but you would only have to cover a $30 copay.

Actually it does work that way if you buy it from the dealer, like a supplemental.

[Mr. Douglas]

Naw. I always buy my cars new and get the first three oil changes free, but then pay for the rest. It’s $40 a pop even with synthetic.

[wildbill]

The problem with any healthcare plan that contains provisions that guarantee losses (such as coverage for preexisting conditions and pregnancy) is that the premiums have to be so high as to make the plan unattractive to the age group that had to join in to make the systematic losses viable.

Young people stayed away in droves because they saw no advantage to them in paying thousands of dollars for insurance while they were healthy. And by letting 18-26 y.o. stay on their parent;s insurance, at the cost of a child’s insurance, Obamacare compounded the problem by removing them from the potential enrollment pool.

I sold health insurance policies for years and the mistake that professors and politicians are making is that you can attract young policyholders to ANY plan that involves them making voluntary enrollment. The only insurance that most young folks want is pregnancy insurance—after they have decided to have a baby or already have one on the way.