4 ms·

Most policies exempt "acts of God", but I think forest fires are firmly in the covered realm. A meteor hitting your house might be in the uncovered area. (They

by lutorm 9y ago

Most policies exempt "acts of God", but I think forest fires are firmly in the covered realm. A meteor hitting your house might be in the uncovered area. (They also exempt acts of war, so a north korean missile hitting your house would also likely not be covered.)

credit_guy 9y ago
I just purchased some life insurance with exactly the North Korean scenario in mind and I specifically asked the agent about the acts of war exclusion. He told me the company doesn’t have this exclusion, and most insurance companies don’t have it nowadays, and if they have it, it only applies to military personnel. Of course, everyone who buys insurance should check with their agent, not take my word for it.
- alex_young 9y ago
  You bought life insurance to hedge against a nuclear attack? I suspect we will have other things than accounting to worry about after an exchange like that.
  - Aeolun 9y ago
    Food is going to be expensive.
  - VLM 9y ago
    The prevailing assumption about nuclear attack is every weapon every manufactured will be simultaneously fired at op who is at ground zero. For all values of op across the entire country. And no other scenario can exist. Which of course is silly. The only wartime nuclear activity we've had on this planet wasn't a nuclear exchange, for example. Most likely outcome is something like a single "dirty bomb" attack on a city 1500 miles downwind of where I work, unfortunately where a datacenter is located, resulting in me putting in a 36 hour work day trying to bring everything up at a disaster recovery datacenter 1000 miles away from both me and the attack, then on the commute home after 36 hours without sleep, I fall asleep driving and die in the resulting car accident, and my family won't get a penny because "clearly his death was a result of a N.K. act of war". Even worse not only might my family not get a penny WRT death but if anyone can sue anyone for anything, and my liability insurance is cancelled because of "act of war" then my family could end up quite destitute after a multi-car accident. I wonder how many people had heart attacks watching the 9/11 news coverage a couple decades ago. Or for any value of american response, a large fraction of the population would be very unhappy with the american response to a nuclear terrorism attack, regardless of the specific response, so my car parked downtown gets set on fire in the riots. That would suck if my car was temporarily uninsured because it was an act of war. There's a lot of people paid a lot of money to deny insurance claims. See also, medical insurance.
- jrs235 9y ago
  Shouldn't everyone read their policy? The written policy is what matters, not what an agent tells you.

by lutorm 9y ago

credit_guy 9y ago

I just purchased some life insurance with exactly the North Korean scenario in mind and I specifically asked the agent about the acts of war exclusion. He told me the company doesn’t have this exclusion, and most insurance companies don’t have it nowadays, and if they have it, it only applies to military personnel. Of course, everyone who buys insurance should check with their agent, not take my word for it.

alex_young 9y ago
You bought life insurance to hedge against a nuclear attack? I suspect we will have other things than accounting to worry about after an exchange like that.
- Aeolun 9y ago
  Food is going to be expensive.
- VLM 9y ago
  The prevailing assumption about nuclear attack is every weapon every manufactured will be simultaneously fired at op who is at ground zero. For all values of op across the entire country. And no other scenario can exist. Which of course is silly. The only wartime nuclear activity we've had on this planet wasn't a nuclear exchange, for example. Most likely outcome is something like a single "dirty bomb" attack on a city 1500 miles downwind of where I work, unfortunately where a datacenter is located, resulting in me putting in a 36 hour work day trying to bring everything up at a disaster recovery datacenter 1000 miles away from both me and the attack, then on the commute home after 36 hours without sleep, I fall asleep driving and die in the resulting car accident, and my family won't get a penny because "clearly his death was a result of a N.K. act of war". Even worse not only might my family not get a penny WRT death but if anyone can sue anyone for anything, and my liability insurance is cancelled because of "act of war" then my family could end up quite destitute after a multi-car accident. I wonder how many people had heart attacks watching the 9/11 news coverage a couple decades ago. Or for any value of american response, a large fraction of the population would be very unhappy with the american response to a nuclear terrorism attack, regardless of the specific response, so my car parked downtown gets set on fire in the riots. That would suck if my car was temporarily uninsured because it was an act of war. There's a lot of people paid a lot of money to deny insurance claims. See also, medical insurance.
jrs235 9y ago
Shouldn't everyone read their policy? The written policy is what matters, not what an agent tells you.