Attention auto insurance sales people.

Bernie Sanders is promoting a single payer “Medicare for All” medical care program. The costs and savings of such a program are much discussed. One thing I have never seen discussed is the effect on auto insurance premiums, a big part of which is for liability coverage for medical expenses for injured motorists. Under the proposal, such coverage would seem to become redundant.

What would be the effect on the costs of auto insurance if this program became law?

Uh, did you read the last thread you started on this topic?

Short version: at least in the example of Canada, the single payer healthcare system recovers the costs of injuries due to auto accidents from the auto insurers (via various means) who then pass those costs on to auto insurance ratepayers. So, at least with that example, the effects of universal healthcare on auto insurance rates are none.

Read about Quebec. I believe something similar is in place there. There is ( like all Canadian provinces) a single-payer health care system. But auto license plates also carry a surcharge for medical costs for patients injured in auto accidents. So, accident victims have their costs of medical care met by a fund of driver contributions, not from the general fund that covers all health care.

I can’t tell you more than that overview, which I might have mis-stated myself, but for those interested, Quebec (and maybe some other Canadian provinces) can be googled for more details.

Sorry, I was having a computer problem when I had tried to post before, wasn’t sure it went through, and was having problems finding it.

But if the cost of medical care is lower due to the efficiencies claimed by a single payer system, then the insurance companies will pay a smaller surcharge which then could result in a lower premium.

Possibly, although like I mentioned in the other thread, car insurance is generally a lot more expensive in Canada than it is in the US, so if cheaper auto insurance is an effect of UHC it’s a fairly minor one. Although, granted, part of that is that most drivers in the US really aren’t carrying enough insurance to cover an accident that results in multiple serious injuries. So we don’t necessarily see the full effects of health spending from auto accidents in our auto insurance rates, because once the auto policy limits are exhausted the costs usually get shifted back onto the healthcare system in one way or another.

Plus, I’m only (somewhat) familiar with the situation in Canada; maybe other UHC countries do actually dispense with bodily injury coverage on car insurance like you’re thinking. I think in general, though, the attitude is that healthcare is a basic human right but driving a car isn’t, so countries try to make it so only people who drive cars shoulder the costs of traffic accidents.

The UK doesn’t. Third party car insurance coverage is required by law and covers property damage to others and medical expenses/lost wages, though this generally means reimbursement to the NHS.