tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post7788514128947694456..comments2024-03-29T06:05:04.162+01:00Comments on Robert's Stochastic thoughts: Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14455788499385673507noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-29965819453708984042009-12-19T17:00:15.358+01:002009-12-19T17:00:15.358+01:00Actually, while the 55-year limit is arbitrary, th...Actually, while the 55-year limit is arbitrary, there is a case to be made that it is fair (compared to some other arbitrary limit). The bill allows insurers to raise premiums with age. Arguably, the case for a public option is weak in the case of younger people, because they will be paying low premiums anyhow (and also because they consume less health care and therefore represent less of the cost containment problem). Even if premiums are too high overall, they will still not be tremendously burdensome for younger people. Where is the cutoff age at which they may become excessively burdensome? I have no idea how to answer that, but 55 sounds like as good an answer as any.<br /><br />Then again, insurers might start overcharging young people (i.e. flatten their age-premium profile) to make up what they lose to Medicare competition on the older ones. Or they might just raise their overall premium scale and let all the older people go over to Medicare.Andy Harlesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17582263872850949568noreply@blogger.com