|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Insurance in the U.S.
|
This Economics related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information. |
| ||
|
| ||||
Wow, just wow. So much wrong there. Rich people tend to have high deductibles, not low ones. CorruptUser (talk) 06:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Reality says otherwise. Psycho Gecko 13:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- If you're wealthy enough not to live paycheck-to-paycheck, a high deductible makes a lot of sense. Insurance companies are basically betting that on average you'll make fewer claims than you'll pay in premiums. The deductible for the insured person is basically a form of self-insurance; the higher the loss (deductible) that one can safely write off, the less one has to pay in premium. For the wealthy, a high deductible makes financial sense by absorbing the risk for potentially smaller losses and using the insurance only for catastrophic losses. Bongolian (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- I've adjusted the article to emphasize class less, though all the claims I've worked on have not worked the way y'all claim. From looking it up, I certainly see people recommending higher deductibles as a "secret of the rich, and so can you!" type of deal, but the point of being rich is that you actually don't need to save money on premiums. Psycho Gecko 23:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- If you're wealthy enough not to live paycheck-to-paycheck, a high deductible makes a lot of sense. Insurance companies are basically betting that on average you'll make fewer claims than you'll pay in premiums. The deductible for the insured person is basically a form of self-insurance; the higher the loss (deductible) that one can safely write off, the less one has to pay in premium. For the wealthy, a high deductible makes financial sense by absorbing the risk for potentially smaller losses and using the insurance only for catastrophic losses. Bongolian (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Rename[edit]
"Insurance in the United States", no? Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 23:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- I was initially worried about the length, but we could do that if people think it needs to stick around. Psycho Gecko 23:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Which one is the United States, though? Did you know that Mexico is officially known as "the United Mexican States"? And then there's all the historical entities that called themselves "United States", like various incarnations of Brazil. And with 'emir' technically just meaning ruler/commander, the UAE could count too. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 00:03, 3 February 42016 AQD (UTC)
- @Psych: Redirects are lovely. ;P
- @142:
- Which one is the United States, though? Did you know that Mexico is officially known as "the United Mexican States"? And then there's all the historical entities that called themselves "United States", like various incarnations of Brazil. And with 'emir' technically just meaning ruler/commander, the UAE could count too. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 00:03, 3 February 42016 AQD (UTC)
|
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Somebody just wants to let you know you did something silly. |
Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 00:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Seriously though, if I ever make it into a position of power, I will avoid calling it "America" or "the United States" as a matter of principle. The principle of annoying Americans, that is. ;) Oops, I mean USAns. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 00:21, 3 February 42016 AQD (UTC)
You're Welcome To Delete[edit]
I know y'all have been moving to being more serious for a long time. No need to keep an eyesore around if it needs to go. User:PsychoGecko 5:00 Somewhere Time, 21 November 2017.