Your auto insurance is regulated and without regulation none of what you said will happen. There is no perfect solution, which ever way this goes someone will get screwed or be unhappy. Both sides should try to earn their money and get to work on this, congress sucks.
1. That's not how insurance works. It's the "law of large numbers". It can't be "winners get reimbursed, insurance company eats only losers". 2. Likely you pay a premium price to be eligible for the refund.... age-old insurance ploy of "giving you back some of your own money".... which you never should have paid in the first place.
Some of this is because people's insurance policies have gotten them accustomed to thinking "calling around" isn't an option. If people could choose and insurance companies (who have all the data on pricing) said "your doctor is claiming your procedure costs X. Here are three providers in the area who are charging less:" that might start a search for value, which breeds competition.
More on how the freeloaders and high risk folks will overload the system, thereby collapsing it in Washington State: http://peninsuladailynews.com/artic...390-on-peninsula-get-obamacare-in-first-month This quote is particularly telling:
Maybe minimum requirements are okay but such requirements should make some sense. The mandated coverages in Obamacare are not logical for the entire US population. Not to sound like a broken record but at my age (59) my wife and I don't want maternity coverage, pediatric dental, pediatric vision or mental health. There should be a wider choice of packages rather than these stupid platinum, gold, silver and bronze that have the same required coverages and are different only s far as ultimate cost to the insured person. Same with what preventive services are provided to the insured at no cost. A 25 year old doesn't need a colonoscopy as part of their preventive coverage whereas anyone over 50 likely does. It's the intrusion of the government into my life and my choices that is flat out wrong. What some people are missing is that the individual policy holders, many of whom have been cancelled, have chosen to be responsible and currently have health insurance. Obamacare was supposed to help the UNINSURED, those lacking coverage. However, it is adversely impacting many millions of responsible citizens in that we are (1) being forced to give up coverage that works for us (2) buy a product that has coverages we don't want or need, and can NEVER even us (doubtful my 57 year old wife will have another kid) (3) raising our premiums substantially (180% in our case) (4) increasing our deductible by 27% (from $10K to $12.7K) (5) no subsidies for us and many of the others who have purchased individual policies (most of us are either entrepreneurs, self employed, consultants, small business owners, early retirees, etc.) as we exceed the threshold to get a subsidy, which penalizes married couples by 50% (subsidy is phased out at $62K versus $92K for 2 unmarried people). Why not allow those who currently have insurance to keep it and worry about the uninsured rather than penalize those who bought insurance. I'm sure some catastrophic policies are not so good but you agreed that ours was darn good when I described our monthly cost, preventive services we get, etc.
Why can't those who consciously CHOOSE to be healthy get a reward? Why should we subsidize fat slobs who take no responsibility for their own health? Slobs my age are being rewarded financially by getting the same premiums as I. If you CHOOSE to abuse your body you should pay a higher premium. If I'm a shitty driver with a few wrecks, speeding tickets and whatever else my premiums will be higher than yours. I pay a penalty for my actions. And IMO slobs should as well with health insurance.
Add a couple of bucks onto the price of those 900 cal. cheese burgers to cover the cost of the bypass surgery the guys going to need in 20 years.
Insurance companies do this to a degree through underwriting.... not so much that those who take the best care of themselves get a better deal than "normal for age", but higher risk people pay a "rated/higher" premium.