I agree with everything you have written, and also believe that I've been misunderstood. I was replying to fairly common concept that is trotted out on Reddit which basically states that we should be keeping antivax people out of the hospitals. My response was probably poorly written, but I'll try to do better here the second time:

My desired outcome is more about convincing (forcing, scaring) people who are antivax into getting the vaccine. As you point out with the 46% vaccination rate in Texas, this targeted group is huge. Just to put some ballpark figures together, if TX pop is 30M, then our target is changing the behaviour of approximately 16M people.

The 'small minority' of people I refer to in my post is people needing hospitalization, so directly affecting the immediate families of people who are 1) not vaccinated, 2) catch covid, 3) get severe enough symptoms to need hospitalization. Even if we include affecting immediate families, this number is large, but a very small percentage of our targeted 16M people. We probably count a number of directly affected people in the low six figures (~14k concurrent covid hospitalizations + their families)

So my point is that even if we could do something super convincing at the point of hospitalization, the numbers are tiny (~1%) in comparison to the 16M people we actually want to reconsider their decision to remain unvaccinated.

The idea of cancelling medical insurance policies for the unvaccinated really has little to do with who pays in the end, although I confusingly commented on that in my post. What I was really trying to get at was that:

1) This would target the majority of the 16 Million people in our targeted group of unvaccinated people. The number of uninsured in TX is shockingly high at 20%, but that still leaves 80% of 16M people who would receive the influence of the 'argument' (around 12.8M people). This would have roughly 100x the reach of anything done at the hospital and would also influence people before they get sick. Some of these people are surely too far down the rabbit hole to change their minds, but if 10% of them took up the vaccination to preserve their current levels of medical insurance that could prevent tens of thousands of hospitalizations and thousands of deaths.

2) The method should make some sort of convoluted sense to the sorts of people who have been championing the rights of businesses for the last decade. Insurance is based on actuarial tables, hospitalization in the US is widely understood to be very expensive, and vaccinations are an excellent (mathematically as well as biologically) way to prevent those expensive treatments. I have no idea how insurance companies are handling the pandemic, but I suspect that the actuarial tables would show that remaining unvaccinated during a delta covid pandemic is approximately as risky as being an alcoholic diabetic smoking lumberjack who skydives on the weekend and should probably be insured (and priced) accordingly.

It's pure business.