> Insurers certaily don't mind you living longer. More payments, less payouts. There are times when this is a problem, but even then it isn't the insurance com

> Insurers certaily don't mind you living longer. More payments, less payouts. There are times when this is a problem, but even then it isn't the insurance companies that are complaining. There was a big "problem" during the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. For reasons I don't quite understand, the holder of the policy (the insured) can sell their policy to a random third party. The seller sells because they need immediate cash for end of life hospice treatment. The buyer buys because they know this person is about to die and they are going to get a cash payout of more than they paid for. This was a guaranteed payout because there was no treatment. This was a rare example of an investment with zero risk and high return. If you got the virus, you were going to be dead in a few months. This is a win-win for both the deceased and the new buyer, and it is neutral for the life insurance company because either way they have to pay the same amount to someone at the time of death. The arrival of AZT cocktails threw a monkey wrench into the whole plan because suddenly a guaranteed death is no longer guaranteed and it leads to an ethical quandary because the "investor" doesn't get a return for their "investment" unless that person dies, and now they are literally wishing death on someone. (see also: There is no such thing as a risk free investment.) https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/10/viatical-settlements-aids-gay-men/572044/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/10/viatical-... "The Gay Men Who Have Lived for Years With Someone Waiting on Their Death"