Yes, individuals cannot buy health insurance for the same rates that employers pay. Some individuals cannot buy health insurance at all if they have preexisting conditions.
> Some individuals cannot buy health insurance at all if they have preexisting conditions.
That's true only if they let their insurance lapse. As long as they don't do that, they can stay with their current, switch, etc, all without waiting periods or a significant premium relative to "well people". (It's been that way for years.)
That's why I wouldn't let insurance lapse if I had a pre-existing condition, so why do folks with pre-existing conditions let their insurance lapse? Or, are we assuming that they do without cause or that they don't know the rules?
Or, are "we" ranting about the system without knowing rules that don't apply to us?
I have employees who were laid off from their previous jobs. They could not afford to pay the COBRA payment and let their insurance lapse. They are now disqualified from private insurance and have pre-existing conditions that are not covered under our group plan.
It is easy to tell people not to let their insurance lapse. If they have no income, this is not feasible.
The point of the article is that the current system inhibits entrepreneurship. Plenty of employees in the current system stay with their employer out of fear of losing their coverage instead of pursuing other opportunities.
> It is easy to tell people not to let their insurance lapse. If they have no income, this is not feasible.
If they have no income, health insurance isn't their only problem. There's housing and food as well.
> Plenty of employees in the current system stay with their employer out of fear of losing their coverage instead of pursuing other opportunities.
Lots of things have that effect, including having kids, buying a house, and so on. Many of them have far greater effect than pre-existing conditions, yet ....
There are also people who can't take the leap because taxes keep them from saving enough. Increasing their taxes to pay for other people's healthcare is going to make that worse.
None of the proposals address cost. (No, preventative care doesn't actually reduce costs. It "merely" makes life more enjoyable.) They just cost shift differently.
>That's true only if they let their insurance lapse. As long as they don't do that, they can stay with their current, switch, etc, all without waiting periods or a significant premium relative to "well people". (It's been that way for years.)
On individual and even small group (or medium size groups) they up your premiums, often by a lot of you have something big done, possibly beyond the point of payment. So yes, "if you lapse it goes" is true, often the COST of insurance goes up 10x if something happens to you and you don't happen to be able to be kicked out on another technicality.
