Yeah, I think it could be a good topic if there were a way of identifying those who voluntarily choose lower-deductibles when "dominated" options available. Sort of like a revisit of the Einav et al Selection on Moral Hazard paper. Thing probably needed is a shock that pushes some to the high ded.

Don't know, but work on behavioral hazard and liquidity sensitivity of use suggests that many who choose dominated options have negative financial costs but likely positive health benefits, since with higher-deductibles they might end up skipping valuable health care (like chronic disease meds).

The University of Wisconsin, Madison is hiring 50!!! (Including lines in every department in the business school this year, including mine).

Links for the Climate/Environmental position:

Assistant level: jobs.wisc.edu/jobs/assista...

Associate/Full: jobs.wisc.edu/jobs/full-or...

Links for the AI position:

Assistant level: jobs.wisc.edu/jobs/assista...

Associate/Full: jobs.wisc.edu/jobs/full-or...