Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpg.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihlpg!tan From: tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) Newsgroups: net.motss,net.med Subject: Re: Politics of AIDS, of Foster Care Message-ID: <1324@ihlpg.UUCP> Date: Wed, 2-Oct-85 00:13:07 EDT Article-I.D.: ihlpg.1324 Posted: Wed Oct 2 00:13:07 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 04:26:01 EDT References: <858@burl.UUCP> <1554@bbncca.ARPA> <865@burl.UUCP> <2034@amdahl.UUCP> <1290@ihlpg.UUCP> <8924@ritcv.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 68 Xref: watmath net.motss:2122 net.med:2493 > > > [E. Michael Smith] > > > The problem: Insurance is a form of socialism. The purpose is to > > > spread the costs generated by one individual over the whole group. > > > ANY attempt to select out ANY higher risk subgroup is in conflict > > > with the basic purpose of insurance. The inevitable result is a > > > reduction in the cost sharing and a lessening of the 'insurance'. > > > (Yes, I know there are differential rates based on various > > > tables, charts, etc. The conflict still remains.) > > --------- > > [Me] > > Wrong. You are correct only if the higher risk subgroup is either > > denied coverage completely or assigned to a separate insurance pool. > > Differential rates (based on risk factors) within the same insurance > > pool in no way lessens the effects of cost sharing. An insurance > > company with a million customers could use so many risk factors > > that no two customers pay the same rate. Please explain to me > > how this adversely affects cost sharing. > > Of course, if the rates are so exorbitant that almost no one in the high > > risk group will buy insurance, that is equivalent to denying coverage. -------------- > [j.r.] > WRONG - WRONG- WRONG! As an unmarried person, I pay the same amount of > FICA (Social Security) Tax as a married person even though I have no > dependents who would benefit if I died prematurely, nor do I have a spouse > who could continue to collect benefits after my death. FICA Tax is the > same for all. > Today, my future retirement benefits are determined irrespective of sex. > Retirement plans are a form of life insurance except the insurer is hoping that > the insured "kicks the bucket" early rather than with the normal life > insurance situation where the insurance company wants you to live to a > ripe old age. ----- I was talking about commercially available voluntary private insurance policies, not Social Security or other retirement plans. They are a completely different ball game, even if you call them insurance. ----- > And what about another form of insurance - to insure that we have an > educated population in the future. ----- I wasn't talking about that either. ----- > These are just three examples when "insurance" premiums are uniform > without respect to age, sex, and marital (family) status. Why then > should we not extend this same philosophy to other forms of insurance! ----- Because the insurance companies would go broke, unless all the customers were comparable risks. It "works" for F.I.C.A. only because FICA is compulsory. ----- > As an aside, I wonder what will be your feelings when AIDS becomes > a disease which affects the heterosexual population in the same > ratio as the homosexual population, and when females are affected > as often as males. This is becoming the situation in 6 African > countries today. > > I don't choose to get a deadly disease any more or any less than I > choose not to get married. ----- I don't understand your point. I did not state my feelings about AIDS or AIDS victims in any way. I simply implied that private voluntary insurance companies must take risk into account when setting policy rates, or they will go broke. That's an economic fact of life. Feelings don't enter into it. AIDS victims are no different than victims of other highly fatal diseases, such as lung cancer, in this respect. The unfortunate prevalence of homophobia in our society should not make you read it in where none is intended. -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com