RE: Workers Paradise. /Political rant.

[Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>]

At 10:18 AM 9/16/96 EST, jbugden@smtplink.alis.ca wrote:
>Two questions, two observations:
>Do you have health insurance?
>Do you have life insurance?
>
>I have commented on your line of reasoning before and and it still seems
to me
>that an important part of the discussion is missed. Specifically, that anyone
>can "save for a rainy day" and still not be able to provide for events
that can
>always happen: Heart attack, stroke, car accident, pinched nerve that
leaves you
>in excruciating pain and unable to work for several years.

However, one can also prepare in the traditional way by having friends and
family.  If you have same, you will always have enough to eat and someone
to take care of you (and also to kick you in the ass when you need it.

>I don't think that a reasonable person would argue that medical insurance
should
>be outlawed because everyone should take care of their own needs. A social
>safety net is simply a form of health and life insurance. Statistical
arbitrage
>if you will. By spreading the risk you minimize the cost. 

Somewhat actuarily unsound however.  If "the welfare" or SS were private
charities or insurance schemes, their management would be in prison for
self-dealing and fraud because of the high overhead of welfare and the
Ponzi scheme nature of SS.

Note too the recent article in the Economist about how European firms are
raising capital in the UK and the US because it is available there in
private pension savings while European government retirement systems suck
loads of capital out of the system leaving nothing but massive government
debts.

DCF