Healthcare Insurance: An Inelastic Product

The cost of health insurance has changed drastically over the years as it has become more expensive. Depending on personal characteristic, the cost of health insurance may vary. For instance, as individuals grow older the more expensive it becomes. In this case, health insurance is more costly because “older individuals require more health care” therefore “the cost of providing health care is rising” (Madura &Atlantic, 2012). Not only does this affect the high cost of health insurance, but the number of individuals uninsured. As stated by Madura and Atlantic (2012), “about one in every five workers is uninsured” and has increased since then because health insurance has become unaffordable. As a result, individuals tend to seek health care elsewhere as they can no longer

Health insurance in the United States is a highly politicized issue. In recent years, many strides have been made to extend health insurance coverage to all Americans with the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). While the program has been vigorously debated in the public realm, arguments are often centered around political ideology rather than economic theory. This paper seeks to challenge the entire structure of the current health insurance model, since its inception in the 1950s. Through the overuse of a third-party payer model, a magnitude of problems have emerged that severely diminish the efficiency of health care allocation in the United States. This paper proposes a model that seeks to correct issues of cost, access, and market efficiency by adapting the Medicare Part D payment scheme for an all encompassing insurance model.

Long time ago, there was no need for health insurance in America, as doctors had many clients because their services were not so expensive and in some cases in rural areas, people could pay by giving other items. Doctors were not as knowledgeable as they are nowadays to care for the sick, therefore this didn't have much effect then on the patients, as they were treated for the basic illnesses.

The health insurance market in the United States has been anything but competitive since the dawn of it 's existence. In many states, a single health insurance provider dominates the market, with virtually no competition (Holahan and Blumberg). In the past, before 2010, there has been no “marketplace” to compare prices for health insurance, which has contributed to ignorance in terms of finding competitive, lower prices for health insurance. Essentially, health insurance providers have been “price makers” rather than “price takers” because the demand for health insurance is relatively inelastic (as people will always get sick or get

In 1915, reformers issued the first major proposal for national health insurance in the United States. In 1929, the first current group health insurance plan was formed. Since that time, Americans have relied on private insurance to help protect their families. Across the nation health insurance has provided a level of comfort when a medical situation arises. Policyholders know that there will be reliable services as well as assistance with the costs. Since the passing of The Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, there has been agitation in Washington, and it continues to be a topic for arguments among Americans. Even though healthcare has always been a priority, an important part of our lives, the ACA, and its provisions are detrimental. The

It is important to begin with the fact that the United States has no formal healthcare system. There are five subsystems: private employer provided insurance, Medicaid for low or no income individuals, Veteran’s hospitals serve military veterans, workers compensation serves individuals that have on-the-job injuries and services for active military and dependents. There is also the Medicare system that serves individuals over the age of 65 (Williams & Torrens, 2008). Even with all these subsystems, there are still many individuals without health insurance. It is also important to realize that having health insurance coverage and having access to healthcare are two entirely different issues. An individual can have insurance but still not have access to healthcare. Of course the goal in the United States is to provide adequate healthcare access to everyone (Beedasy, 2010). This is not always possible due to different demographics such as age, socioeconomic, and other issues. I have health insurance but with the deductible extremely high many times I cannot afford to go to the doctor. For individuals that are low income, this issue is a problem. There is a gap between income low enough to qualify

Health insurance is a type of insurance coverage that covers the cost of an insured individual’s

In attempting to remedy the unjust nature of the American health insurance system, one cannot determine what a just system should be based on the current assessment of society. Inequalities within the current system cannot foster discussion for what we believe is justice because preconceived notions cloud the judgment of even the foremost health policy intellectuals. Many philosophers therefore turn to creating hypothetical societies where these inequalities do not exist as a means to facilitate the discussion as to what true justice requires. Two such individuals, Ronald Dworkin and Charles Fried, have constructed such situations as a means to assess what a just healthcare system should be comprised of in a truly fair-market economy. Although they agree on issues pertaining to the resources available to individuals in a fair market, they also disagree on what constitutes justice in regards to how individuals may spend their allocations. An assessment of the disagreements between the two reveals that the main consideration for what justice demands of society boils down to the degree to which individuals are responsible for purchasing their share of health insurance as well as their fellow citizens’.

the unsettling fact is the lack of universal coverage and high prices are literally linked, both economically and historically.single-payer health-care (that means the government pays for universal coverage, usually through your taxes) and it helps keep the cost down.

According to the Washington Examiner journals, health insurance is in high elasticity of demand, however, President Obama ignore the elasticity of demand for health insurance. Involving, citizens to make cautious and wise decision on purchasing insurance, or otherwise, pay the consequences of being uninsured.

It is estimated the uninsured population will reach as high as twenty-three million people even after the implementation of the ACA. Undocumented migrants and exempted individuals fall under the uninsured population. The exempted individuals are those who will pay higher than “8% of their household incomes on health insurance”; therefore they are not required to adhere to the individual mandate of purchasing health insurance. As a result, other policy interventions are needed if the US seeks to promote universal health insurance coverage. Perhaps the US should consider other countries’ practices as they have tried to deal with undocumented migrants’ health coverage. For instance, in Spain, undocumented migrants can only seek medical treatment for emergency, maternity, and pediatric care. Proving limited care may be a good choice for the remaining uninsured. Also, since the US does have non-profit hospitals, perhaps the undocumented migrants should seek care at those designated hospitals only. In addition, those same options can cross over to the exempted uninsured individuals. However, I feel the exempted individuals would be best served in another way. Perhaps the income qualification guideline for Medicaid should be increased to

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed into law on March 23, 2010, represent a landmark in the U.S. health policy.1 The ACA is the most comprehensive reform experienced by the U.S. health system. The individual insurance market has been transformed by this reform which mandates residents to have health insurance, expands public insurance and reduces the cost of private insurance plan and reduces and reorganizes spending under the nation’s largest health insurance plan, Medicare.2 Persistent challenges relating to access, affordability and quality of care in the U.S. health care system has been resolved by the ACA.3

Mandating every American to have health insurance coverage reduces the risk of high medical expenses to all because there is a larger number of individuals in the insurance pool (Mason, Leavitt, & Chaffee, 2014). First and foremost, health insurance must be reformed first, if it can be reformed and it is affordable for individuals then it may not be necessary for a mandate. Every American is entitled to quality healthcare regardless if one is uninsured or underinsured.

Currently, the issue of health insurance has been a bone of contention for the public regarding whether the United States government should provide this health plan or not. People often possess different perspectives and refer to pros and cons on both sides of the spectrum. While some believes a universal healthcare system will set a foundation for a lower quality of service, increasing governmental finance deficit, and higher taxes, others do not hold the same thought. A universal healthcare system brings enormous advantages rather than disadvantages, such as all-inclusive population coverage, convenient accessibility, low time cost, and affordable medical cost, all of which not only provide minimum insurance to the disadvantaged but also improve the efficiency of medical resources distribution.

By far the biggest weakness in the health technology debate is that HIT does not address the fundamental issues that leave to expensive health care: moral hazard and adverse selection (Blumenthal, 2006). Moral hazard is the idea that if consumers have generous health insurance, they over utilize health services. This concept—supported by the RAND health insurance experiment—raises the overall price of health care in U.S. Adverse selection is the idea that mainly sick patients purchase insurance and healthy patients forgo purchasing insurance. This not only raises the price of health insurance and limits coverage, it leads to what is called a “death spiral”, a phenomenon that describes an insurance company going out of business due to the sickest, most costly patients staying on insurance plans. Neither moral hazard nor adverse selection are impacted by HIT, which questions how much of an impact health technology will have on the healthcare system.