Comments on: Should Insurers Be Allowed To Discriminate Based On Age?

By: Jennings

Jennings — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:42:20 +0000

Companies should not be able to discriminate based on age.. it’s crap. But don’t worry– with Obamacare you won’t have even think about insurance coverage! Over 50– let em die!

By: A Healthy Blog » Obama’s Health Insurance Consumer Protections - We’re Almost There in MA

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:59:55 +0000

[...] be more than double the premiums for the youngest. We think the 2:1 ratio should be tightened (see our blog from March), but it’s much better that the 6 to 1 or higher ratios in many [...]

By: Baby Scales

Baby Scales — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:05:56 +0000

Absolutely not.. It should be straight across the board.

By: Ashton

Ashton — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:34:35 +0000

@J Braxton: Insurance has always been a ponzi scheme.

By: J Braxton

J Braxton — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:00:41 +0000

“The trick is to bring down their premiums by encouraging more younger people to get insured and thereby boost the amount of available funds.

Unless health insurance is mandatory raising young people’s premiums will hurt that goal.”

This just sounds like a huge Ponzi scheme doesn’t it? Really, I don’t see much difference.

John

By: Carolynn

Carolynn — Thu, 21 May 2009 15:36:06 +0000

We’re not really talking about “older” people, we’re talking about upper middle age people ineligible for Medicare.

Presumably they pay more because they are more expensive to insure, and because they earn more (in a perfect world).

The trick is to bring down their premiums by encouraging more younger people to get insured and thereby boost the amount of available funds.

Unless health insurance is mandatory raising young people’s premiums will hurt that goal.

By: A Healthy Blog » Why Should Older People Pay More For Coverage?

A Healthy Blog » Why Should Older People Pay More For Coverage? — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:50:07 +0000

[...] Yesterday the Globe reported on the impact of age-based pricing for health insurance. Older people can be charged twice as much for the same coverage, which can force older consumers to purchase less comprehensive policies. The Globe article showed the plight of Sue Rummel, a 62-year old self-employed Danvers seamstress struggling with $2,400 in medical debt from a less expensive, skinnier plan with high out-of-pocket costs. The ACT!! Coalition empathizes with older residents faced with unaffordable coverage, and we have significant concerns with age-based pricing (see our blog and the interesting comment back-and forth from March). [...]

By: BrianZ

BrianZ — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:16:25 +0000

Dr. Buyse,
It would seem that the Massachusetts mandate eliminates the need to make health insurance more attractive to younger people. They are required to have it now. Age rating IS discrimination, just as race rating would be.
The reason you use age as your criterion for a sliding-fee scale, is because it is easy to quantify. You already have the data, and people can’t lie about their age when you have their SSN for verification. However, it is one of the least useful factors to determine how much caring for a person’s health will cost.
I am fifty years old. I just finished the Boston Marathon with a better time than three of my teammates who are in their thirties. I don’t smoke, drink, use drugs or take any medications. My father lived to be eighty-five. My mother is alive and well at eighty-seven. My blood pressure and cholesterol are perfect. I don’t eat red meat or trans fats. I take a vitamin supplement every day. And, my BMI is normal.
Yet, my cost for the same insurance plans offered by the Mass Health Connector are more than twice what they are for a coworker who is overweight, smokes, drinks and does not exercise, simply because he is younger than I am.
I believe that this is illegal discrimination. And, if it is not, it should be. I intend to become very active in fighting against this discriminatory practice, and I encourage anyone who reads this to be as well. Contact your representatives. Contact the ACLU. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. Don’t take this lying down!

By: Nancy Turnbull

Nancy Turnbull — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 11:58:35 +0000

Marylou, I just wrote a response to your same comment on the WBUR Commonhealth website so you (and anyone else who is interested) can check it out there once it’s posted at: at:http://commonhealth.wbur.org/nancy-turnbull/2009/03/two-thoughts-about-possible-reforms-to-the-massachusetts-health-insurance-market-by-nancy-turnbull/#comments.

Neil, I agree with you wholeheartedly on the wisdom that comes with age. Thank goodness there are some benefits!

Nancy

By: Dale

Dale — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 08:52:55 +0000

We want (or should want) the level of rating classification which maximizes the amount of medical care delivered. This is NOT necessarily the same as maximizing the number of people covered, which is what the insurance industry always talks about. Read this paper:
“Loss coverage as a public policy objective for risk classification schemes” http://tinyurl.com/cgal3g