Health care bill: fewer insured, higher premiums
by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, November 13, 2009 | 1 Comment
Obama Care - more uninsured, higher premiums, writes economist Martin Feldstein in the Washington Post:
A key feature of the House and Senate health bills would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions. The new coverage would start immediately, and the premium could not reflect the individual’s health condition.
This well-intentioned feature would provide a strong incentive for someone who is healthy to drop his or her health insurance, saving the substantial premium costs. After all, if serious illness hit this person or a family member, he could immediately obtain coverage. As healthy individuals decline coverage in this way, insurance companies would come to have a sicker population. The higher cost of insuring that group would force insurers to raise their premiums. …
The higher premium level would cause others who are currently insured to drop coverage, pushing premiums even higher. The result would be a spiral of rising premiums and shrinking numbers of insured.
In an attempt to prevent this, the draft legislation provides penalties for individuals who choose not to buy insurance and for employers that do not offer health insurance. But the levels of these fines are generally too low to cause a rational individual to insure.
The answer is not to increase the penalty for not buying insurance. Just ask those in Massachusetts, where insurance premiums are increasing at nearly twice the national rate. (Family premiums are also most expensive.) It’s time for free-market health care reforms.
(via John Goodman)
Comments
Praise for PPC From Our Lefty "Fan"
- "Zany-ass bombast-entertainment...Hackneyed weirdo communist pseudo-nostalgia" --Alan Franklin, ProgressNow
Featured Posts
- Rising Oil Production in Alberta: More Evidence Disproving Hubbert’s Peak
In today’s environment it’s hard to find good news. But this is good news: the free market is working, and putting statists’ predictions, like Hubbert’s, to shame. Oh, the joy!
- Regulatory Agencies Continue to Slow the Economy
- Printing Money Doesn’t Work in Britain Either
- Oklahoma’s Constitutional Amendment Would Pit Taxpayers Against Unions
- Friday’s Unemployment Numbers: Correcting the Corrections
- Romney Woos Grand Junction, Earns Sen. King’s Endorsement
- The Borking of Netflix: movie service finds privacy law to be an inconvenience





November 13th, 2009 @ 9:17 am
The more we find out about this monstrosity, the more we understand why they tried to shove it through in August. They’re still trying to shove it through, but the people’s increasing knowledge of what it really is makes that a lot more difficult.