The best thing about the Affordable Care Act is that it prohibits discrimination based on preexisting conditions. If a sick person applies for health insurance, the insurance company has to issue it, and the rate can only be set based on your age, smoking status, and location.

So the entire risk pool/population has to bite the cost of the "previously uninsured"? Whether they want to or not? Sorry, nevermind that second question, it was rhetorical. Of course it doesn't matter if they want to or not, it's effectively a government mandated "tax". Taxes are almost never voluntary.

Yes, it makes sense if you think about that "tax" as the payment for the lottery ticket of a functioning body and brain.

Every person here won that lottery ticket, when we could have just as easily suffered from any number of horrible diseases and disorders. Not wanting to pay higher premiums b/c the "lotto losers" are included is like not wanting to pay for a lotto ticket after the fact because you know the rare outcome won't hit you.

So because the current best option is grouping people based on imprecise risk factors like age, demographics, and hereditary problems, we should forever turn a blind eye to individual warning signs even if they could save our lives?

This is a depressingly pessimistic way of ignoring the real underlying problem: health care is too fucking expensive.

Well, if google adds 20+ years to the avg life span, the whole insurance industry will need a massive revamp to keep up (already needed, IMHO).

I wonder what the actuaries think of this product.