X-Message-Number: 13911
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 01:12:33 -0700
From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: self-insurance for cryonics orgsAs for other innovations, I have 

Robert Ettinger wrote:
> As for other innovations, I have previously mentioned the
> possibility of the cryonics organization in effect--although not
> formally or legally--providing the insurance. The member would make
> periodic payments, and the organization would agree to suspend the
> member upon death regardless of the payment total at time of death.

> There are two main problems. One is getting it past the lawyers,
> making sure we wouldn't be found to be violating the laws
> regulating insurance companies.

> The other problem would be evaluating the prospective member and
> assessing our risk. This is probably sufficiently daunting to make
> the project impractical on a large scale any time soon. But it
> might not be impractical on a small scale. If this deal were made
> initially with only a very small number of people, an organization
> such as CI would not be endangered even if the members died
> immediately. (CI directors do not currently have this under
> consideration.)

I thought insurance companies could only make money at all because
there _was_ a large number of people involved.  And why would we
assess the risks significantly differently than an insurance
company would?  They have many actuaries with full-time jobs
assessing risks day in and day out, and setting fees accordingly.
Do we *have* to reinvent the wheel here?

Kennita Watson          |  I vote Libertarian.
      |      Find out why.
http://i.am/kennita     |           http://www.lp.org/intro

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13911