Posted on 08/03/2013 1:43:23 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
TWO beliefs continue to shape debate on Obamacare. First, pre-existing medical conditions shouldnt prevent people from obtaining affordable health insurance. And second, people who dont want health insurance shouldnt be forced by the government to purchase it.
These may seem to be reasonable positions. But they are incompatible. Thats been shown by historical events, and its now being strikingly confirmed by recent experience in the emerging Obamacare insurance exchanges.
The crux of the matter is what economists call the adverse-selection problem. Uninsured people with pre-existing conditions often face tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket medical costs annually. If insurers charged everyone the same rate, buying coverage would be far more attractive financially for people with chronic illnesses than for healthy people. And as healthy policyholders began dropping out of the insured pool, it would become increasingly composed of sick people, forcing insurers to raise their rates.
But higher rates make insurance even less attractive for healthy people, causing even more of them to drop out. Before long, coverage would become too expensive for almost everyone.
The adverse-selection problem explains why almost no countries leave health care provision to unregulated private insurance markets. It also predicts that requiring private insurance companies to charge the same rates to everyone will make it prohibitively expensive for most people to buy individual health insurance.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
....because your pro-government healthcare, pro-gay, liberal candidate was stupid. I would never vote for a NE liberal GOPe, never.
point!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.