- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Question to libs about prexisting conditions and high risk
Posted on 9/21/17 at 11:27 am to roadGator
Posted on 9/21/17 at 11:27 am to roadGator
quote:
They are identical in the way premiums are set.
If you are talking about risk as a whole, then yes. But the risk factors used are very different, no?
quote:
If you can't adjust your pricing due to risk then it's not insurance.
Definition of insurance is "a practice or arrangement by which a company or government agency provides a guarantee of compensation for specified loss, damage, illness, or death in return for payment of a premium."
Now, I understand that an insurance policy may provide for premium adjustments in the event of loss, damage, illness, etc, but all I'm saying is that I don't think it's right to adjust for certain factors. I'm paying for protection from getting a serious illness, and what you are saying, is that there is no guaranteed compensation for an illness, since insurers can just adjust premiums to whatever they see fit based on new risks. That isn't insurance. That's a subsidized health plan. It's not protection if my premiums can be extremely increased if a serious event occurs at no fault of my own.
2
Posted on 9/21/17 at 11:38 am to SUB
quote:
I'm paying for protection from getting a serious illness
That's not what you are paying for. I don't even think you believe that. CAn you rephrase that? Not trying to be a dick.
Yes, the risk factors being evaluated are different between a company that insures automobiles, health, shipping containers, renters, etc. You are absolutely correct. The methodology is the same.
quote:
I don't think it's right to adjust for certain factors
OK. If you insure shipping containers and your insured is sending containers through an area known to be full of pirates should they be able to charge more? When you first began providing them insurance they didn't serve pirate infested waters?
Of course, they should be able to charge more because the new data available says that they are a higher risk due to freaky pirates.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 11:50 am to SUB
Even though the actuarial process may be the same, heath and auto insurance are different animals. Most people pay somewhere between $50-200 for auto insurance because the risk profile of each person doesn't vary too significantly. Everyone gets in accidents from time to time.
With health insurance, the elderly and the chronic patients eat up most of the costs. Everyone else is just subsidizing their care, whether through premiums or taxpayer funded subsidies. There is so much disparity in risk that it's difficult to put people into pools together.
With health insurance, the elderly and the chronic patients eat up most of the costs. Everyone else is just subsidizing their care, whether through premiums or taxpayer funded subsidies. There is so much disparity in risk that it's difficult to put people into pools together.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News