If I insure my car against flat tires, and I already have a flat tire, the insurance company must pay to fix the flat I have, and cover themselves for flat tires I may have in the future. The logic of the insurance company is, it will cost 15 dollars to fix the [pre-existing condition] flat tire, and on the average car drivers have about one flat tire a year, so the insurance company needs to charge me 15 dollars for the current flat, 15 dollars to cover the likely next flat and another 5 dollars to make money. Doesn't it make sense to just outright pay for the flat I already have? Insurance is supposed to be about sharing future risk. Covering pre-existing conditions is sharing known debt plus future risks. Tell me where my logic is off base.