If you work for someone else and have great group insurance coverage, consider yourself lucky. It's becoming more and more of a rarity, as this USA Today article notes:

Last year, 60% of employers offered group coverage, down from 69% in 2000. The number of uninsured rose to 46.6 million, up from 44.8 million in 2005.

The article's focus is on employers who have switched from providing insurance coverage to simply handing out extra cash and having employees buy their own coverage. One of the arguments for this system is that it allows healthy workers to get coverage for less money, because under a group health insurance plan, insurance costs more per person due to the fact that everyone pays the same premium. In essence, the sick workers get covered at a lower rate while the healthy workers pay more than they ever use. And, of course, it costs the employer less money.

Here's a quote from one of the companies that helps individual workers find coverage:

Canopy's Kashyap says most people can get insurance. Those who cannot, he says, should be looked upon like bad drivers, who have to pay more for auto insurance. He expects health insurers, possibly with the help of government or employers, ultimately will develop coverage for higher-risk people.

"There are some people in the minority who will be adversely impacted, but the system in general is designed for the majority," Kashyap says.

Yikes. People that get sick should be looked at as being the same as bad drivers? I know many people do things to sabotage their own health, but many, many people get sick through no fault of their own. Bad driving is generally a result of sloppiness or taking stupid chances or going too fast-all choices made by the bad driver. To compare the two is to say that a person with a medical condition has chosen to have the condition through his or her actions, and thus deserves to pay more for insurance. That's insensitive at best, outrageous at worst.

I have had to purchase health insurance for my family on the open market for a number of years now, and I can tell you that my premiums get jacked up every year regardless of how much we use the coverage. And, if we get upset and look for new coverage, the new insurance company will only cover us after they slice out any "pre-existing" condition they can think of, no matter how minor. The message is: we'll cover you if you never use the coverage.

I'm not talking about needing a new liver. I'm talking about any minor condition that might need future help. As the USA Today article points out, if you have hay fever, your insurance company can cover you for everything but respiratory issues, because, of course, it's more likely you might actually use that coverage.

And God forbid you get cancer while on an individual health policy. They might not be able to drop you from coverage altogether, but they can raise the rates so high that the insurance is basically worthless.

This is not to say that I believe employers should be obligated to provide group health coverage in order to balance out the sick and the healthy. Health insurance is a job benefit, not a right. There is no logical reason a business owner has to foot the bill for his/her workers' health needs. But any worker of any age who thinks they are better off buying their own coverage (or choosing not to because they are young and healthy) is fooling themselves. The day is going to come when they get sick for real and they see how they are treated when it comes time to renew their policies.

Group health insurance that allows the few who get sick to get treatment without going bankrupt is absolutely necessary, whether that's through an employer who offers insurance as a benefit or through a government-sponsored entity that partners with insurance companies to allow individuals to buy into a group insurance plan. Any other system sends the message that you are on your own, that getting sick is always your fault, and that no one should feel sympathy for the person who gets devoured in this dog-eat-dog world.