Re:Tontines may make sense despite their history of disrepute
by sokoloff on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @09:39AM
(#11862179)
"The risk is borne by the company selling it" is true of all insurance contracts. That isn't enough to explain why people dislike annuities but buy other types of insurance.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Tontines may make sense despite their history of disrepute
by maxerickson on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @09:58AM
(#11862280)
In the US, I think it's fair to say that the typical insurance policy is required somehow or another.
I guess there are lots of people that rationally purchase homeowners insurance, but there's also lots of people that purchase it as a requirement of their mortgage. Auto and medical both have lots of government rules that push people to purchase them.
Re:Tontines may make sense despite their history of disrepute
by sokoloff on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @05:30PM
(#11865830)
Yes, but the compulsory liability insurance in my state is something ridiculously low (like $20K, IIRC). I carry a significant multiple of that, which is an example of buying optional insurance.
Life insurance is another purchase that's typically voluntary.
Re:Tontines may make sense despite their history of disrepute
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @02:43PM
(#11864534)
Different kinds of risk. Normal insurance doesn't care if the stock market drops 30%. Something guaranteeing payout for decades has to buffer against that possibility.