X-Message-Number: 15532
From: "John de Rivaz" <>
References: <>
Subject: Re: nics insurance payoffs
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:58:40 -0000

> Message #15525
> From: 
> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 23:11:03 EST
> Subject: cryonics insurance payoffs
> John, I like most of your posts..

Thanks for that, but I am unable to follow your mathematics without a figure

> but the mathematics regarding insurance
> funding are pretty straightforward.  *If * you can qualify for the
> health wise and are under age 70, the lost interest on setting aside
> will in most cases PAY the premiums on the insurance policy.

At what rate of "interest" do you base your calculations?  Do you take into
consideration compounding of the interest into the investment?

> Let me ask a simple question.  Do you think the possibility of some of
> heirs contesting a will or launching a legal attack on your spending
> (or even $35,000) on cryonic suspension is a real one?

You also need to ask: "Is the risk of your cryonics provider deciding that
your policy is unsuitable (for perfectly sound and valid reasons) at some
time in the future a real one?" I don't suggest that this is a reason to
eschew life insurance, only that nothing is perfectly safe.

The world if full of evil people, I agree, and if they can join a group,
gang, or club, or hire other evil people to help them to indulge in their
evil and in their plunder they get bolder.

These that encourage these evil people for the benefit of their own personal
gain and aggrandisement try and make the public beleive that legacies are
something they should get by "right".

They are not, of course, they are a distribution of a surplus from someone's
life. If they were not a "surplus", then that person would have given them
away earlier. I actually mentioned this idea to a senior lawyer not so long
ago and he thought about it for a moment and admitted that this is perfectly
logical - he only wished the majority of his clients felt the same way!


> On the other hand, life insurance policies create this huge lump sum,
> BY LAW goes DIRECTLY to the named beneficiary.  No probate, no delay, no
> danger from creditors, no contested wills.

Why is it then that this apparent loophole in the legal system, that
otherwise allows evil people to rape estates, exists?

The life insurance industry and the legal profession help each other
co-exist because of it.


> (State Life was founded in 1895).

Equitable Life in the UK was very well thought of for many years. Try doing
a search for "Equitable Life" on http://www.bbc.co.uk

Ultimately people have to chose savings and investments they are comfortable
with. There are evil systems around who will try and force the public to
chose methods which earn these systems the most money. Not Mr Hoffman I
hasten to add - he is just stating the facts that result from these evil
people's actions. Very similar points have been raised in the past in
Longevity Report.
The leaders of the life insurance industry are richer than Bill Gates ever
could hope to be. The axis they spin between their companies and lawyers who
rape estates sucks this wealth into the coffers at both ends. The electorate
could solve this issue by demanding legislation that ratifies people's
freedom to leave their estates and instructions for the disposition of their
"remains" by a properly binding will and testament, not some expensive sham
document that is just someone's opinion and which is open to debate in the
courts after the death.

Funding cryopreservation by investments can be strengthened by making a
proportional pre payment every year once the investment portfolio has built
up substantially.

I would dearly love to see some form of group of cryonicists who could give
people who contest cryonics wills and other arrangements a lot of sleepless
nights, but I feel that such action could be damaging to the movement.
Retrospective action may be possible though, if in fact the first
reanimations occur within the natural lifespans of officials now living.

But ultimately - investments are a personal matte. I would advise everyone
to read all the ideas and chose what you want. Make your money work
furiously for you, possibly risking attack from the descendants of the hired
gunslingers of the wild west, or have it growing slowly in an artificial
safe haven  whilst you work furiously to pile in more to keep up with the
latest opportunities in cryopreservation.

You may like to take the bet with the life companies where you "win" if you
die early. If this happens, then life insurance wins handsomely over
investment. Theoretically, if you were to be killed after making only one
premium payment, you'd get the full payout. If you are happy with this
wager, then take it.

[The wild west analogy also suggests the following: Who made more money?
Those that risked the gunslingers in the frontiers and built homesteads or
those that stayed in the eastern cities and worked as clerks or labourers.]

*Neither* is "right" for everyone. My prose is undoubtedly emotional - you
can write emotional prose to suggest the point the other way round. But the
important point is to be comfortable with what you have chosen.

Sincerely, John de Rivaz
my homepage links to Longevity Report, Fractal Report, music, Inventors'
report, an autobio and various other projects:
http://www.autopsychoice.com - should you be able to chose autopsy?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15532