Many people write or speak to tell us what we should think. Some want to be believed because they are experts, or think they are. Some want to be believed because they claim to speak for us. Some have had revelations. Others want us to trust them because they communicate through prominent media outlets. Many tell us what we should think. I write to encourage my readers to think for themselves. I write to ask you to inquire. Question me. Have fun.

  
Comment of the Day
How to pay for the wall?

Apr 04, 2017

If you want to build the wall, pay for it with your own money. How much of your own money are you willing to donate? Trump received 62,979,879 votes. If each of Trump’s supporters voluntarily donates at least $1,000, which corresponds to about $42 per month for the next two years, and if we encourage those who are more affluent to double their donations, then Trump can have on hand about $100 billion, which may suffice for a substantial piece of the wall. Hence, all of you who are talking loudly about spending my money on building this wall, stay away from my wallet, but open your own wallet and send money to the “Build the Wall Fund.” Put your money where your mouth is.

PREVIOUS COMMENTS
What is wrong with Russia?
Dec 22, 2015

It appears that Russian leaders cannot free themselves from the medieval concept of regional influence, where weaker neighbors were subdued into becoming serf states. Is anyone capable of explaining to them that in these times of a global economy, any influence comes from economic strength? Russia, thanks to its size, natural resources and well-educated labor force, has everything that it takes to maintain a dominant position in the region, just by maintaining free trade with all its neighbors. It can do so without military interventions in Georgia and in Ukraine. Russia has everything that it takes to be a respected wealthier neighbor, to whom everyone in the region would turn for help when needed. Instead, it is a bully and a hooligan. It would take so little to change that. But it is so hard for Russia to do it. 

More
Closed mind for closed borders
Nov 19, 2015

Known to some as a libertarian, Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. speaks against open borders. His argument is that it is an infraction against private property. He misses the point that most people migrate just because Mr. Rockwell’s neighbors want them on their private property – for picking apples, washing the dishes or writing a computer code. Then, Mr. Rockwell wrongly laments that those foreigners invited by his neighbors violate his private property rights by loitering in the public spaces that he frequents. He wants the government to deny the rights of his neighbors to do on their private property whatever they wish, so he will not need to face immigrants in the public spaces. Mr. Rockwell left the train called “liberty” at the station called “xenophobia.”    

More
They do not know…
Sep 14, 2015

Mr. Trump says: “A lot of what I’m doing is by instinct.” I prefer that our President would make decisions based on systematic due diligence. The instinct that guides Mr. Trump in his professional life arrives from his vast experience, starting when he was growing up under the mentoring of his successful father, followed by a solid education and years of practice. Mr. Trump's confidence is misguiding, as it gives his supporters the illusion that someone who mastered real estate dealing can be equally skillful as President. It is similar to the illusion surrounding Dr. Carson, that he can be as good a President as he is a brain surgeon. If both gentlemen were humbler, they would realize that they qualify to be President equally as much as Mr. Trump qualifies to conduct brain surgeries and Dr. Carson to run Mr. Trump’s real estate empire. The problem is not that they do not know many things they should; the problem is that they do not realize that.

More
Freedom cannot be legislated, its restriction can
Mar 31, 2015

Indiana voted in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In his WSJ piece, Gov. Mike Pence claims it was needed to protect the religious freedoms of Hoosiers. Every legislative act by its nature limits someone’s freedom. The only way of increasing freedom is by identifying existing laws that curb personal liberties and then eliminating them.  Hence, if Gov. Pence sees that under some circumstances, the religious freedoms of Hoosiers are not respected, he could correct the situation by eliminating laws causing this problem. We have the Bill of Rights, and it suffices. No “enhancements” are needed.

More
Greed-driven health care
Feb 27, 2015

The solution to our health care crisis is in the implementation of more market-driven mechanisms into our health care policy. This is the only way to give patients the freedom to make decisions regarding their care between them and their doctors; not having these decisions made by faceless bureaucrats. The biggest obstacle in implementing a change of this kind is in a deep public conviction that the introduction of the free market into health care will result in doctors, hospitals, the pharmaceutical industry and everybody else involved being guided by their greed, not the best interests of sick people. The biggest challenge in overturning Obamacare is not in Washington. It is in winning the argument with Americans that free-market-driven health care can serve their needs much better than the government-distributed one.

More
Immigration inaction
Feb 17, 2015

Congress could not agree on the immigration reform. President Obama resorted to executive orders. Now he is stopped by a court order. It is sad to see that this legal wrangling substitutes for real discussion on why we have this immigration crisis and what we should do to get it resolved. Most Americans have strong, ideologically motivated views about immigration. If they were right, the policies implemented would work, and we would not have a problem anymore. We have an ongoing problem because most Americans are wrong in their understanding of what caused massive illegal immigration and what we should do to get it corrected. There will be no progress until someone  addresses this problem. For more about why we have this immigration mess go here.  

More
More Comments

Why life cycle health insurance?

In the recent years, health care has been a hot political issue. Much more than many other contentious political issues, health care is very intimate for all of us, as earlier or later we all will need some medical assistance, and we want to get the best at affordable cost.

It is banal to say that the current system of health care in the U.S.A does not work. Americans cannot agree why it does not work; they disagree on how to fix it as well. For some, health care is just a service that we buy similarly as food or housing. For others, it is an inalienable right that society should provide unconditionally to everyone, similarly as education.

Even if people can agree on this very divisive issue, they face the next step – what is the most efficient way to provide health care? Some believe that all Americans can have fair access to medical services only if government manages the key components of health care sysytem. Others, quite opposite, believe that we all can have better access to essential for us medical services when they are provided by the private sector, with very limited regulatory only role of the government.

Every of these arguments have some valid points. However, a sharp-eyed observant of debates about health care can easily notice that too often opinions are based on ideological preferences, on preconceived notions of the debaters, not on the calm analysis of facts.

To make things even more entangled, most of Republicans strongly oppose to “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”, often known as “ObamaCare”, but among themselves they cannot agree on a viable alternative.

Confused and frustrated with all the political canvassing, I decided to study the issue from the beginning and to form my opinion on facts that I can find, and verify. This website documents my search for the truth about health care. Please follow my steps, verify my facts and logic. I concluded that we need life cycle risk insurance. Please verify my deductions, please add yours.

The problem

  • An individual is interested in health care for the length of his or her life, not in yearly health insurance contracts. Hence, any workable solution needs to offer lifespan coverage.
  • An individual is mostly concerned about major health failures. Hence, any workable solution needs to focus on catastrophic coverage.
  • Young and healthy people tend to not buy health insurance. However, without their contributions no health insurance system can work. Hence, a workable solution needs to have provisions such that a majority of young and healthy Americans would buy health insurance of their own free will.
  • Only after addressing the above issues, we can implement the free market mechanisms suggested in many proposals presented by opponents of the public option. In particular:
    1. Individual ownership of insurance policies. There is no reason that health insurance should be chosen and paid for by an employer.
    2. The freedom to buy health insurance across the state borders.
    3. Curbing frivolous lawsuits by reforming tort liability laws.

The Solution

  • The core of the system should be life-cycle health risk insurance, covering expensive treatments and end-of-life care.
  • This insurance would step in and cover expenses above some predetermined per-year limits, cumulative limits for consecutive years, and cumulative limits over the person’s lifetime.
  • This insurance should not be mandatory. However, people buying this insurance should have hefty tax breaks so buying this insurance would be common.
  • For covering minor medical bills, individuals would use the current system of health maintenance plans, Health Savings Accounts, or would pay out of pocket.
  • Poor people would use Medicaid as they do now.
  • Lifespan health risk insurance would accrue cash value. The government would guarantee this value using instruments similar to those used when guaranteeing the safety of bank deposits.

Fixing The Current Mess

  • The health insurance industry needs to be told plainly and boldly that offering life-cycle health risk insurance is the only possible alternative to a government run health care system.
  • Those people who currently have health insurance would, at the contract renewal, have their current policy split into two policies: a non-cancelable lifetime-long health risk insurance, and a yearly health maintenance plan.
  • When signing-up those presently uninsured, insurance companies will face various risks. A one-time adjustment needs to be negotiated into the start-up of this system.
  • Life-cycle health insurance plans, in order to operate, need some cash resources that would accumulate gradually, but will be not available at the beginning. Some one-time government assistance might be needed to start this system.
  • A legal venue should be opened for seniors to migrate voluntarily from Medicare to the private insurance plans. Eventually, this should lead to lowering the burden that Medicare puts on the Federal budget.

Problems We Will Face

  • There always will be neglect and irresponsible individuals opting out of the system. If at the time of their health failure, out of compassion, they would receive the same care as people contributing to the system, then we will encourage more individuals to act irresponsibly.
  • Life-cycle health risk insurance would resolve the hot-button issue of pre-existing conditions. However, being in its essence catastrophic insurance, it would leave as an issue the pay structure for minor chronic illnesses, those that would not trigger life cycle health insurance, but still could be an unbearable burden to a person of moderate means.

One thought on “Why life cycle health insurance?

  1. William Sutton

    They say their are no atheists in foxholes. Probably not many actuaries in the chemo outpatient either.

    I agree that a consultant from Mars would also arrive at the life-cycle as the key component to structuring health risk pools that is not addressed in today’s market and products.

    The facts on Earth are that healthcare services will be increasingly structured as public goods if a material portion of voters see themselves cutoff or potentially cutoff in a dire situation. If that principle can be established, then the discussion becomes more open to pareto efficiency.

About me

I was born in 1951 in Gdansk, Poland.
Since my high school years, I have interest in politics and love for writing. During my college years, I started writing to student papers and soon became freelance author to major Polish political magazines.

In 1980 I wrote a book “Czy w Polsce może być lepiej?” (“Could it be better in Poland?” – this book is available only in Polish) analyzing major problems in Poland at the time and outlining possible solutions.

I was among those Polish political writers who by their writings contributed to the peaceful system transformation that finally took place in 1989. Since 1985, I live in the Chicago area. I went through the hard times typical of many immigrants. Working in service business, I have seen the best and the worst places, I met the poorest and the richest. I have seen and experienced America not known to most of politicians, business people, and other political writers. For eleven years, I ran my own company. Presently, I am an independent consultant.

My political writing comes out of necessity. I write when I see that the prevailing voices on the political arena are misleading or erroneous. Abstract mathematics and control theory (of complex technological processes) strongly influenced my understanding of social phenomena. In the past, my opponents rebuked my mathematical mind as cold, soulless, and inhuman. On a few occasions I was prized for my engineer’s precision and logic.

I have a master’s degree in electronic engineering with a specialization in mathematical machines from Politechnika Gdańska (Technical University of Gdansk).

... more