The other day, I was reminded of one of the lies we’ve been fed about the Health Care Takeover the Democrats are desperately trying to pass through the Houses of Congress: The Individual Mandate, which would be just like your mandated automobile insurance. This specious line of reasoning has been almost forgotten amidst the arguments over abortion funding and the Constitutionality of reconciliation and trying to “deem” a bill passed by rule.
The individual mandate would require every American to purchase health insurance, or to pay a penalty (I call it a fine, because that’s what it really is) if they choose to go without. Proponents of this insurance mandate argue that it is like automobile insurance, where we are required to purchase liability insurance for our automobiles before we can drive them on the roads. They say that this mandate protects individuals from the financial harm of medical bills they cannot afford.
In this limited line of reasoning, they are correct, but that isn’t the whole story. Read the rest of this entry »
Filed under: economics, health care, insurance, cost, democrats, health care, healthcare, mandate, premium, public option, reconciliation, takeover
14 November, 2009 • 08:28
In all the fuss about the House Health Care “Reform” bill, we have failed to talk about one of the biggest drivers of health insurance costs in the nation today: Insurance mandates.
What insurance mandates do is force these small risk pools together in a negative way: When the risk pool for broken leg is combined with the risk pool for cancer, the risk pool is not more efficient, it is simply more risky. If the likelihood of a broken leg in a given year is 2%, and the likelihood of being diagnosed with cancer is also 2%, combining those risk pools does not result in a larger risk pool of 2%. Cancer and a broken legs are generally exclusive; that is to say, people who get cancer are unlikely to suffer a broken leg at the same time. So the risk index has grown from 2% to a combined 3.99% (after all, some people who break their legs will also develop cancer). The more mandates that are added, the more the insurer is required to cover, the greater the cost of the risk pool.
The financial risk pool is even more complex, but I’ll try to simplify it. Read the rest of this entry »
Filed under: economics, Government, insurance, liberty, democrats, health care, house, insurance, local, mandate, reform, state
20 September, 2009 • 21:19
Not since Bill Clinton asked what the definition of “is” is have I seen this kind of hair-splitting shennanigans.
Barack Obama is so desperate to “prove” that his health care plan won’t raise taxes that he argues with Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary.
Read the rest of this entry »
Filed under: economics, insurance, taxes, health, insurance, mandate, Stephanopoulos, tax