Home > Life and Choice > Jobo and Wazzisface

Jobo and Wazzisface

September 15th, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

I imagine you have your local version of this pair.  Ours is these two Hippy Dippy Drivetime DJ's touting some pay by the week car insurance outfit. They show up late night and on those oddball cable channels.  The only relationship you'd like with them or the insurance agency is to have them trying to pick which walnut shell the pea is under.  Better yet, get access to their clients for some 3-card poker monte.

How can they make money selling crap insurance?  Because the insurance is mandated.  You don't have it?  Congrats, you are now starring on the new Jail season opener.  Without proof of insurance you can't get your license plate.  The insurance is minimal and protects the other guy more than you. 

Why couldn't they just do that for health insurance instead of drafting a 1200 page bill that even the authors don't understand?  It'd be something along the lines of a 5K deductible major medical with the first $500 annually covered on a co-pay.  It wouldn't make hospitals or doctors whole but it'd be better than treating folks with no health insurance.  The max payout would be controlled.  So, the policy would be affordable. 

That's a crappy policy but it get the patient more than he has now.  If an employee wanted more then he pays.  With employer support of part up to about what Whole Foods has.  You want more?  Negotiate and pay out of your pocket.  This would work across a wide range of business without bankrupting them.

It is pretty much how the car insurance industry operates.  We may battle a bit with the car repair guy or even the insurance company.  But, an arbiter is available from the state licensing arm.  So, the schlock insurance works as intended.

Look, many of us are driving a set of wheels that'd get you the operation of your choice at Mayo Clinic for the same bucks.  OK maybe it is you and the bank and the policy is a bit better/costly than having just collision insurance.  But the other guy in the lead sled next to you at the light who can't afford your Ferrari or Lexus has solace of sorts with his minimal policy. You, he, and society are better off as a result.

It seems that the problem is that the Liberals want this Cadillac policy for everybody.  Nobody involved can afford that.  The solution seems to put Jobo and whatever on TV selling a basic health policy that you also need to show at the license branch. 

OK, so it runs out and the liberals run those folks through their committee with the sad tale. Well, the unfortunate is better off than he'd have been with no insurance and maybe a foundation or charity will step in.  Maybe not.  But, without that base policy they'd be dead already.

This solution won't make anybody happy but that isn't governments job.  Society can't pass out cash for every clunker – human or auto. 
ADDENDUM:
You welcome to send this or your version to your congressman and senator under your name.
For the lazy, just cut and paste it here and here.
 

 

Related posts:

  1. Let me assure you.
Categories: Life and Choice Tags:
  1. September 15th, 2009 at 20:39 | #1

    When you crash a car there are two possible parties at liable. 1) the company that financed your car because obviously they want you to keep paying for it, or, they want it to be worth something in case you stop paying for it and they need to repo it. And 2) the person/s who’s car you now destroyed and they need to have their car fixed.

    fly by night auto insurance exists because the government mandates it because the insurance industry demanded it when the government stuck their noses in their business in the first place.

    It could be debated that human health and physical welfare is worth a little more than an automobile. Of course with what’s going on in the country today, it doesn’t really seem that way.

    just sayin’ :)

  2. September 16th, 2009 at 06:43 | #2

    Minimal insurance only covers the other guy. And I agree that human health is worth more than a car. That isn’t the discussion. The discussion is strictly economics. If we weren’t involved in the problem of the moment, it isn’t a starter.

    Economics affect whether we have certain assets or at least where having them doesn’t create too great a burden. We see the results of poor choices all the time. Hummers and big-ass boats get repo’d in my area all the time.

    Government isn’t subject to repossession but the outcome could be worse. I have Medicare and am damn happy I do. If you ask me if I am entitled to it then that a difficult question. Medicare is the reason the fund is headed for the crapper. Is my health trumping all those lives that my cost will affect in the future?

    Such question are ones that politicians are loathed to address. It is easier to buy us all the great, expensive presents that don’t seem to cost us.

    People have gotten smarter about costs. The complaint is the uninsured are vulnerable. Minimal insurance makes them less vulnerable. In the last analysis, we’re all medically vulnerable. And insurance will never solve all of that.

    We need to realize there isn’t an answer that doesn’t also affect everyone else. Ignoring that can lead to unintended consequences. If human life trumps all things then lets start flying everybody to Switzerland for monkey gland shots like people with too much money can do.

    My proposal is callous but practical. And it might help reduce costs for the rest of the population.

  1. No trackbacks yet.