5 ms·

This directly leads to discrimination against disabled people among other groups. For instance wheelchair bound people have a much lower average live expectanc

This directly leads to discrimination against disabled people among other groups. For instance wheelchair bound people have a much lower average live expectancy. The lives of people who are (born) disabled or have some debilitating genetic disease don't need society to make their lives even harder. > If you have a higher chance of getting a disease, why wouldn't life insurance be more expensive? The answer to that is: Not spreading such risks evenly among everyone is morally reprehensible. Imagine your reward for living in constant pain and having a higher chance of dying early is society kicking you in the balls for the crime of being born like that.

wlesieutre 3y ago
My car insurance company knows I have a Y-chromosome and charges me extra for it. Seems to be a universal practice at least in the US.
- StanislavPetrov 3y ago
  A lot of discriminatory practices exist in the US. We should strive to eliminate them, not expand them.
  - memefrog 3y ago
    No, we should not 'strive to eliminate' them. The entire point of insurance is that it is based on risk assessments that are as accurate as possible, using all the information that is available. It is not a wealth redistribution mechanism, but a randomness redistribution system. If you know that you have an illness, and don't tell your insurance company, then you're a fraudster. If you know you have a genetic predisposition to illness, that's no different. Discrimination is not inherently a bad thing. There are specific lists of special reasons, and discrimination on those bases is considered bad and has widely been made unlawful. Usually, insurance is an exception! And it should be. I don't see why men should subsidise the health insurance of women or why women should subsidise the car insurance of men. I don't see why the young should subsidise the health insurance of the old. That's not the point of insurance.
    - ghusbands 3y ago
      You're pushing a very limited view of insurance, here. There are plenty of cases in the world where insurance is a "randomness redistribution system" across a whole population, where the lottery of genetics is also considered part of that randomness, avoiding building in discrimination.
      - memefrog 3y ago
        Do you have any examples?
        ghusbands 3y ago
        Health insurance in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Switzerland, among others, cannot charge more for pre-existing conditions. If you include state-provided care, then health care in basically every EU country, as a core principle of the EU is that everyone has the right to timely access to affordable, preventive, and curative health care of good quality. Also, it's law in many countries that you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of protected characteristics, no matter the mechanism or how unfair it may seem to those with privilege.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      >No, we should not 'strive to eliminate' them. The entire point of insurance is that it is based on risk assessments that are as accurate as possible, using all the information that is available. And we should change the law so that point of insurance is made illegal, and insurance companies can only use generic, broad, information about a person, not bend over so that they can maximize their profit margins and minimize their risks.
      - memefrog 3y ago
        It's not about making more money for them. It's about making sure I am not subsidising you and you are not subsidising me.
memefrog 3y ago
> This directly leads to discrimination against disabled people among other groups. Yes, of course if someone has a disability that puts them at a higher risk of some event, and they want to insure themselves against that event, they'd pay higher insurance premiums. That's like, the entire point of insurance. If you live in an area that is prone to flooding, then you either can't insure yourself against flood damage or the insurance premiums are a lot more expensive than someone living in a desert. If you smoke, your health insurance and life insurance premiums are higher. If you have type 1 diabetes, you will probably struggle to get any meaningful amount of life insurance. What alternative are you proposing? That anyone purchasing insurance will automatically be expected to subsidise the insurance premiums of people that are at higher risk? That's not what insurance is for. If you want to redistribute wealth from people without disabilities to people with disabilities, then you can do that using taxes. But not by pretending there's anything wrong with honest risk assessment in insurance. >The answer to that is: Not spreading such risks evenly among everyone is morally reprehensible. Imagine your reward for living in constant pain and having a higher chance of dying early is society kicking you in the balls for the crime of being born like that. Nobody is being 'kicked in the balls'. Stop using such emotionally manipulative tactics and such charged language. Insurance is about spreading random risk. It is not for spreading systemic risk. I don't think you understand the purpose of insurance at all.
- clnq 3y ago
  > If you have type 1 diabetes, you will probably struggle to get any meaningful amount of life insurance. This is not true, and sadly it's a harmful myth in the T1D community. More info - https://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetic-life-insurance.html https://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetic-life-insurance.html.

wlesieutre 3y ago

My car insurance company knows I have a Y-chromosome and charges me extra for it. Seems to be a universal practice at least in the US.

StanislavPetrov 3y ago
A lot of discriminatory practices exist in the US. We should strive to eliminate them, not expand them.
- memefrog 3y ago
  No, we should not 'strive to eliminate' them. The entire point of insurance is that it is based on risk assessments that are as accurate as possible, using all the information that is available. It is not a wealth redistribution mechanism, but a randomness redistribution system. If you know that you have an illness, and don't tell your insurance company, then you're a fraudster. If you know you have a genetic predisposition to illness, that's no different. Discrimination is not inherently a bad thing. There are specific lists of special reasons, and discrimination on those bases is considered bad and has widely been made unlawful. Usually, insurance is an exception! And it should be. I don't see why men should subsidise the health insurance of women or why women should subsidise the car insurance of men. I don't see why the young should subsidise the health insurance of the old. That's not the point of insurance.
  - ghusbands 3y ago
    You're pushing a very limited view of insurance, here. There are plenty of cases in the world where insurance is a "randomness redistribution system" across a whole population, where the lottery of genetics is also considered part of that randomness, avoiding building in discrimination.
    - memefrog 3y ago
      Do you have any examples?
      - ghusbands 3y ago
        Health insurance in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Switzerland, among others, cannot charge more for pre-existing conditions. If you include state-provided care, then health care in basically every EU country, as a core principle of the EU is that everyone has the right to timely access to affordable, preventive, and curative health care of good quality. Also, it's law in many countries that you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of protected characteristics, no matter the mechanism or how unfair it may seem to those with privilege.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    >No, we should not 'strive to eliminate' them. The entire point of insurance is that it is based on risk assessments that are as accurate as possible, using all the information that is available. And we should change the law so that point of insurance is made illegal, and insurance companies can only use generic, broad, information about a person, not bend over so that they can maximize their profit margins and minimize their risks.
    - memefrog 3y ago
      It's not about making more money for them. It's about making sure I am not subsidising you and you are not subsidising me.

memefrog 3y ago

> This directly leads to discrimination against disabled people among other groups. Yes, of course if someone has a disability that puts them at a higher risk of some event, and they want to insure themselves against that event, they'd pay higher insurance premiums. That's like, the entire point of insurance. If you live in an area that is prone to flooding, then you either can't insure yourself against flood damage or the insurance premiums are a lot more expensive than someone living in a desert. If you smoke, your health insurance and life insurance premiums are higher. If you have type 1 diabetes, you will probably struggle to get any meaningful amount of life insurance. What alternative are you proposing? That anyone purchasing insurance will automatically be expected to subsidise the insurance premiums of people that are at higher risk? That's not what insurance is for. If you want to redistribute wealth from people without disabilities to people with disabilities, then you can do that using taxes. But not by pretending there's anything wrong with honest risk assessment in insurance. >The answer to that is: Not spreading such risks evenly among everyone is morally reprehensible. Imagine your reward for living in constant pain and having a higher chance of dying early is society kicking you in the balls for the crime of being born like that. Nobody is being 'kicked in the balls'. Stop using such emotionally manipulative tactics and such charged language. Insurance is about spreading random risk. It is not for spreading systemic risk. I don't think you understand the purpose of insurance at all.

clnq 3y ago
> If you have type 1 diabetes, you will probably struggle to get any meaningful amount of life insurance. This is not true, and sadly it's a harmful myth in the T1D community. More info - https://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetic-life-insurance.html https://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetic-life-insurance.html.