« Sanity from the Left? Amazing! | Main | How to Profit from Terrorism »
November 13, 2002
Well... sometimes the right is
Well... sometimes the right is almost as wrong as the left. I am reminded of this every time I read conservative articles on health insurance, or when I contemplate early retirement.
The subject is health care. The problem is universal coverage (a political goal that will grow much stronger as baby boomers age and retire early).
Conservatives believe they can solve "the health care problem" by introducing market incentives to the market. They propose reforms such as personal health care accounts (similar to IRA's) where health insurance money goes into a pool that the consumer can spend only on health care. They claim this will introduce market incentives in health care shopping that will reduce health care costs, leading to less expensive health insurance, which will lead to more coverage. Another proposal is to provide tax deductibility to individually purchased health insurance.
These proposals are helpful, more or less, but they will have almost no impact on those unable to purchase insurance, who fall into the following categories:
- Those who are too poor to buy insurance but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid. These people will gain only marginally. A few will be able to afford less expensive insurance, and the costs of some care may go down. They don't pay enough taxes for the tax assistance to make any difference.
- Those with pre-existing conditions who cannot buy insurance at any price, or who can only buy insurance that covers areas that are least likely to lead to great expense. This group includes many who have paid insurance premiums throughout their lives, which is clearly unfair. These people cannot take advantage of either reform because they can't get the insurance at any price.
Pre-existing conditions either prevent the purchase of insurance, or cause a whole host of diseases to not be covered. For example, if you have ever had high blood pressure, you might find that your insurance doesn't pay for your heart attack.
The latter are increasing in number. The solution to this problem is *not* free market, because health insurers simply have no market incentive to offer this insurance. The reason is what is called "adverse selection" - an insurance term referring to the tendency of people to not pay until they get sick. Because insurance is based on shared risk, adverse selection destroys its fundamental statistics. Thus the free market will always lead to the exclusion of those with pre-existing conditions. I call this practice "perverse selection."
In an ideal world, one would purchase health insurance when young and healthy, and have that coverage last through life. But insurance is not sold this way. It is not portable (even with the COBRA rules). It lasts for the duration of a job plus at most 18 months, and can then be converted to perrsonal insurance (at potentially prohibitive rates). Personal insurance lasts until the insurance company decides to cancel it, or rearranges risk pools to put high risk people into ever higher cost policies (a distressingly common practice).
What this means is that "health insurance" in the US is not insurance... it is prepaid health care that expires under unresonable conditions.
One step in the right direction would be to force insurance to be separate from employment. This would cause all health insurance to be personal, and would put dramatically different incentives on the insurance issuers.
But, without further steps, it would significantly increase the uninsured, for two reasons:
- Many of the young would simply opt out, greatly increasing the cost of insurance to those who are left. The hidden secret of all health insurance schemes is that the young subsidize the old. This is not as unfair as it seems, since one day the young will be old.
- The "perverse selection" of the insurance companies would disqualify a huge number of people from purchasing adequate insurance.
A better solution is to *require* people to purchase insurance, and to do away with medical underwriting (perverse selection). Also, the reform should make insurance universally portable. Of course, this is a big government intervention which conservatives (including this author) hate.
The left's approach is to create a giant bureaucracy and try to force all decisions, in minute detail, by government. This will lead ultimately to huge costs tied to the sort of poor service that socialized medicine is known for: the British National Health System disaster; the Canadian system which has affluent Canadians purchasing their care in the US because their system can't provide it; the New Zealand system which simply will not provide expensive care to anyone over 60 - effectively sentencing them to death.
The American people must decide: If we want universal coverage, we must recognize that the current system only works by historical accident (insurance is mandatory for most employees), and that it excludes a large number of people (about 15% of the population). We must also recognize that achieving universal coverage will not be achieved by market forces alone, so this political goal is one which requires government intervention.
Conservatives need to recognize the strong political demand for health care security. This demand can only grow as boomers age. Without adequate and realistic conservative programs, Hillarycare will ultimate win the political battle.
Conservatives should also realize that the current practice of perverse selection is a drag on the economy, and provides a counter-incentive to savings and investment (why save and invest if the first illness will leave you destitute anyway?). Why form a creative company if you lose your health insurance to do so - putting all of your assets at risk?
And finally, if this problem is ever solved, this author, who has paid for health insurance through employment for decades, will finally be able to retire without risking his entire savings on medical bad luck.
The author can be reached at:
blog AT tinyvital.com
(replace the AT with @ - I post it this way to discourage spam)
Posted by John Moore at November 13, 2002 08:30 AM
Comments
>>>has affluent Canadians purchasing their care in the US because their system can't provide it.
Posted by: can at February 6, 2004 02:51 AM
>>>the Canadian system which has affluent Canadians purchasing their care in the US because their system can't provide it
The system can provide it; however, there are waiting lists on some procedures. If wealthy Canadians can get it faster in the US and do not want to wait - welcome to fill their boots. The Canadian system is far, far from being perfect, but as a society the consensus is that health care is something that should not be left to the free market.
Posted by: can at February 6, 2004 02:57 AM
Excellent points, and heavily correct. I fear that the Right is once again cutting off its left ear based on the purity of individualism and "minimizing taxes", thus abandoning our society to the inevitability of government directives just to meet the clear demand of the populace.
Conservatives always say that we believe in markets. In the case of basic health care, the market of industrialized nations has clearly moved to externalizing the health care system away from businesses, thus relieving tham of the burden of playing social worker. We still kill small business development and new job formation by dumping that problem away.
What we need (I will go into more detail on my own blog, mnkurmudge.blogspot.com) is to do two things- 1) enforce universal coverage, in the same way as auto insurance is now required, and 2) remove the barriers that enable large risk pools, in the rough manner as the 380-some German "sickness funds".
Then, new start businesses will be able to do what they do best- outcompete everyone else in the world.
Glad to see that someone else is looking seriously at this issue from a free-market perspective. Reality is that you sometimes have to accept a less wonderful tactical point to achieve the strategic objective. On health care, we are always defensive and incompetent, visionless. Shame on Republicans with no guts. At least Tim Pawlenty has some cojones to address this.
Posted by: Duane at March 15, 2004 12:55 PM
The "mandatory insurance" idea is interesting. What I've never seen recognized in U.S. media is that it is the current system in Japan. In Japan you have to buy govt. insurance, private insurance, or employer-sponsored insurance.
Posted by: CK at March 15, 2004 05:24 PM
Online Tramadol is one of the most prescribed treatments for pain in the world. More than 55 million people have taken cheap Tramadol to relieve their back pain, shoulder pain, and other chronic conditions. By acting on parts of the brain that trigger pain, and by reducing the size of pain signals that travel throughout the body, Tramadol provides powerful pain relief in just minutes! Buy Tramadol Now or visit this site: http://www.top-tramadol.com
Posted by: tramadol at August 11, 2004 06:16 PM
The Health Savings Account idea isn't bad.
Posted by: Ramiro Rodriguez III
at March 8, 2005 02:01 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)