Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Fire Insurance

Maybe I'm biased, but in America we seem to have a pretty good system for dealing with fires. When your house is burning, the firemen come and put it out. Then afterward you sort out damages with the insurance. But the fire gets put out. No smoldering embers or gas manes left leaking. If there are you get to sue them.

I wonder what it would be like if fires were handled more like healthcare.

Your house catches on fire and the firemen rush over. They put out most of the fire, so it's not going to catch up again since things are so wet. But there's still a gas leak and some piles in the basement are still glowing. But your house won't burn down anymore, at least not right away, so they go. Then you have to sign some forms and see if you can get an insurance-approved fireman to put out the last few dangers. Because of paperwork he isn't even allowed to under the front porch, though you can clearly see a few flames already. But firemen are expensive and paying out of pocket just isn't an option. You've missed work and are behind on bills. Eventually you think you've settled all the billing and pretty much taken care of the fire. A few months later the house explodes and kills you. The insurance company refuses to pay or send anymore firemen to your house to get your children out.

Yep, the second example in which fires are handled by the free market, rather than those lazy socialist firemen, that sounds pretty good doesn't it?


Gronthe said...

I've had my house burn down as a kid, not fun. I like socialist firemen. I don't like free-market or socialist health care. I've been on both ends and both provide minimal coverage. Only the wealthy can get ALL the healthcare they need.

I honestly don't know the BEST way to do it, but having been both poor and having been denied benefits from free-market care, I'll never support either form. I may not be smart enough to know what would be the optimal system, but it's got to be out there somewhere. Maybe a middle ground is actually the answer, or close to it? I just don't know.

Klepsacovic said...

A middle ground would seem to be the answer, defining where that will be is the hard part. Well okay, the hard part is first getting past the barrier of "socialism means Stalin will eat our babies!"