Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (236949)	11/5/2013 11:37:51 PM
From: Sam	Respond to of 542043

BTW, I agree wrt to the maternity issue, with one caveat: Gender is not one of the inputs, so the only way insurers can factor that one in or out is on age AFAIK, and I'm sure they do use age extensively in their cost estimations and hence premium quotes. My guess is that the truth about how insurers charge is rather like how hospitals charge--they look at the actuarial numbers and then they stretch them and see what the market can bear. In their case, unlike hospitals they have to go through regulators, but these are state regulators, and, like duh, the insurers develop some cozy relationships with those regulators, who often allow them to get away with murder. I know several actuaries who attest to this little scam. Some states are fairly honest, some are absurdly dishonest, others are middling. Which is one reason why insurance companies would just love love love to be able to offer policies that cross state lines--you would find out in a hurry which states are the most, um, "business friendly" w/r/t insurers. A "Delaware" for insurers would emerge within a year or two of that becoming legal.