Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:42 PM
 
8,581 posts, read 9,064,014 times
Reputation: 5898

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Not necessarily. Ever wonder how Lloyd's of London determines the premiums to charge for obscure insurance policies?
You mean like insuring slave ships back in the day? I recall reading about one particular Lloyd's of London insured slave ship that ran low on food and fresh water. So, the captain threw a hundred or so shackled slaves overboard alive after dragging them out of the hold where they were stacked like cords of wood. It got so ugly that some slaves became so depressed they just dived overboard, about 20 did just that. Later when they returned to England they demanded compensation for their insured live cargo that was lost. Lloyds refused to pay for those who where tossed overboard but covered those that jumped over board voluntarily. Ugly business, and would rather not have my health care delivered to me primarily by a stinking racket.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:42 PM
 
21,989 posts, read 15,619,579 times
Reputation: 12943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
No carrier will take them as they are too risky.
Maybe they should have thought about that before they became so selfish, self-centered and made people feel less generous toward them. Now they should pay the going rate whatever that is and I'm sure it will be quite high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:44 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,599 posts, read 44,324,456 times
Reputation: 13530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Sure but LLoyd's is willing to take a loss if offset by other gains.
As is any insurer. The point is that Lloyd's DOESN'T overcharge those who present a low risk, unlike Obamacare, Medicare, or any other form of socialized health care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:46 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,599 posts, read 44,324,456 times
Reputation: 13530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
I've seen your compounded interest calculations. They are completely laughable
Refute them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:46 PM
 
18,740 posts, read 8,354,532 times
Reputation: 4117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
Maybe they should have thought about that before they became so selfish, self-centered and made people feel less generous toward them. Now they should pay the going rate whatever that is and I'm sure it will be quite high.
Would you suggest that they cut their own throats the night before they become 65 y/o?

(lol)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:47 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,599 posts, read 44,324,456 times
Reputation: 13530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
It is not always that cut and dried or so simple. Many people totally responsible like myself and wife can be hit with very serious disease and medical bills. And also the other side, where total medical miscreants die from having too much sex at 101!

(lol)
And that's all factored into the risk formula. Actuaries aren't stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:47 PM
 
18,740 posts, read 8,354,532 times
Reputation: 4117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
As is any insurer. The point is that Lloyd's DOESN'T overcharge those who present a low risk, unlike Obamacare, Medicare, or any other form of socialized health care.
Call any HC insurer and see what they would charge a perfectly healthy 65 y/o. Few exist, but see what they say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:49 PM
 
18,740 posts, read 8,354,532 times
Reputation: 4117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
And that's all factored into the risk formula. Actuaries aren't stupid.
Of course not. They can see into the future!

(lol)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:49 PM
 
21,989 posts, read 15,619,579 times
Reputation: 12943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Would you suggest that they cut their own throats the night before they become 65 y/o?

(lol)
No, they should use their benefits first, why waste them? Where's that same concern for families who do not have health benefits? Would you suggest the same? Benefits are not always available. They are often going the way of pensions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
It is not always that cut and dried or so simple. Many people totally responsible like myself and wife can be hit with very serious disease and medical bills. And also the other side, where total medical miscreants die from having too much sex at 101!

(lol)
And younger families can have a child with leukemia through no fault of their own. That's the problem with health insurance. It should be a right but it's not. You can choose not to drive but you don't have a spare body. As younger generations see the greediness of older generations, reality will set in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,479,588 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
You do not hear the truth in this area. Large taxes would be needed. Corporate profits would rise as they would not have to pay for their employees coverage. The individual would not see the cost on their earnings as it would just be another part of their federal taxes. This would be bad overall as right now too many do not know where their federal tax dollars go and what those dollars pay for.

Most employees as well as many on this forum complain about costs but do not understand the share their employers pay into their coverage.

Universal coverage is good idea but the population will need to understand what they will gain.

I like the idea of Medicare for all, but most think that means its free when it truly is not.
No two countries do Universal Healthcare the same.

Some only have a public option. Others only have a private option. Most are a mix.

Some require employers to pick up a portion of the cost while some do not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top