Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Men's Group

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)

6. "Messing with the system for political purposes doesn't change the arithmetic . . . "

Reply to TreasonousBastard (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 11:20 AM

Oct 2012

Bingo.

I have no particular love for the insurance companies. But in all fairness they can back their claims up with hard math. And their profit margins are far from exorbitant compared to other industries (Apple profit margins makes the insurance companies look like charities).

And as much as it may appear otherwise when it's *you* involved they aren't out to get anyone in particular.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Double standard in reporting gender based insurance costs [View all] 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 OP

Exactly right. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #1

I spent around 20 or so years as a insurance underwriter... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #2

"Messing with the system for political purposes doesn't change the arithmetic . . . " 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #6

Lots of actuarial data exists. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #10

Oops! Just reread my post and what I meant was... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #11

Try as I might- digonswine Oct 2012 #3

In both cases people are charged more due to their gender 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #4

I'm glad you were not comparing the two as equal- digonswine Oct 2012 #5

As I explained upthread, they are equivalent... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #7

I understand that from the insurer's viewpoint- digonswine Oct 2012 #8

I agree with all that 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #13

I'm not even sure how you would make the argument from a social justice viewpoint Major Nikon Oct 2012 #17

I plug any argument or discussion around Health Insurance into my operating system, and I always get Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #9

"US gets single payer health care system! Women expected to be benefit most" 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #12

Everyone would win. Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #14

I would go two steps farther Major Nikon Oct 2012 #16

Hmm, I would think that a SPHC funded through taxes would do that sort of automatically Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #19

Just because something is discriminatory, doesn't mean it's wrong Major Nikon Oct 2012 #15

Yup. The opposite of "discriminate" is "indiscriminate" lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #18

I think it is counterproductive to universal and/or single payer Major Nikon Oct 2012 #20