I write about insurance and you answer with remarks about the insurance business. Public policy is my bailiwick, not business, but as best I can tell the insurance business is a lawful wager. The only way you can win your wager is if something bad happens to you, and the insurance companies hire armies of actuaries to the end of making sure the odds remain with the house.

And that’s legal?

Speaking of legal, in my first judicial term I watched a guy get deported for running a red light. As a result, his American citizen child was left with his American citizen wife living on welfare until he made his way back, which he certainly would. If I were him, no wall would keep me from my wife and child.

What about you?

Remember that gremlin I was using to represent what is off in “all else being equal?” If this gremlin is what you posit, he could easily be slain without leaving millions of people uninsured. I doubt you have IDed the gremlin, because other nations seem to run their national health insurance programs without the fairly obvious answers like graduated co-pays. I’m perfectly OK with making the investigation, though. Track down what is making this or that population cost more to cover and then have a political debate about whether the public should subsidize my obesity or somebody else’s smoking.

Right now, instead of charging extra for risky behaviors most insurance companies offer discounts for changing behaviors. Isn’t that the same thing?

No, it’s not. Think about it.