To the Editor:
James Shapiro's '10 "Ratty-nomics" column ("Ratty-nomics: What the meal plan can teach us about healthcare finance," Oct. 19) distorts the economics of the candidate's proposals for universal health care. At Brown, students need to eat every day. The quality of food provided today has no bearing on the food necessary to sustain students in the future. As long as students are given enough food to live, they will need to eat again next week.
Preventative health care, however, greatly reduces long-time health insurance costs. The current structure of health insurance in this country does not encourage preventative care. Many are unable to purchase health insurance that covers much cheaper preventative measures. Instead, the uninsured are forced wait until the condition has fully manifested itself and then head for an emergency room. The cost of these procedures are much higher than the preventative measures ever would have been.
Another fundamental problem with current health insurance is the way providers structure rate increases after the insured fall ill. We buy insurance to defer risk. After someone is struck by tragedy, insurers try to "dump" them by increasing rates and decreasing benefits. Michael Moore's "Sicko" revealed the nasty truth about health care in America: Often when you think you're covered, you really aren't. Insurers justify their increases by claiming they are now adjusting for previously undisclosed genetic conditions. In truth, they provided the initial insurance below cost, and try to saddle those who are affected with higher premiums so they will be pushed out, and the insurer is no longer liable for their medical care. If insurance exists to defer risk, how do we justify increasing rates for those who are struck by disease? Aren't insurance companies just reneging on the initial deal?
Jake Heimark '10Oct. 20
