Re:New York Regulator Probes UnitedHealth Algorithm for Raci...
by 8f2ab37a-ed6c on Sunday October 27, 2019 @06:48PM
(#21372965)
I think that's an interesting point, and I can't say I have a well thought out position on it, but I'm happy to have stumbled upon this conversation.
One one hand, I feel ok paying extra for my health care to cover others who might have been left out previously because of individual pre-existing conditions. Us pooling all together to take care of every citizen makes sense.
However in a purely hypothetical scenario where say men are 1000x worse at something than women, let's say driving, say car insurance for women is $100 and it's $100k for men, should we really charge women 50k just to make it fair based on the "we must ignore gender" principle? I realize in the real world there might be no such stark contrast between genders or ethnicities, in which case giving everybody the same higher rate would probably be more sensible.
One one hand, I feel ok paying extra for my health care to cover others who might have been left out previously because of individual pre-existing conditions. Us pooling all together to take care of every citizen makes sense.
However in a purely hypothetical scenario where say men are 1000x worse at something than women, let's say driving, say car insurance for women is $100 and it's $100k for men, should we really charge women 50k just to make it fair based on the "we must ignore gender" principle? I realize in the real world there might be no such stark contrast between genders or ethnicities, in which case giving everybody the same higher rate would probably be more sensible.