The conversation

Business & incomeExperience excerpt · English

Back in the dark ages, the University I worked for had a lab full of computers stolen

Back in the dark ages, the University I worked for had a lab full of computers stolen. I discovered that the University did not have insurance for this, or for a lot of things, because the University was a large organization with a lot of assets and could easily absorb the cost of theft. I'll assume they got the risk analysis right, since they wrote the textbooks on that sort of thing. The math changes though if you are dealing with a non-profit insurance system. For example, becoming a member of a well designed co-op, or a genuine non-profit insurance company (one that returns excess to members rather than pay bonuses to executives). But still there are problems, since not every member brings the same amount of risk, so you get a good deal if you know you are higher risk than the insurance company believes and vice versa.

Original discussionWhat makes gambling wrong but insurance right? (2017)313 source comments · at import
2

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

BE

Having insurance is gambling, but not having insurance is also gambling. This is because life itself is a gamble. We don't know what the future holds and we have the choice to insure or gamble on just about any aspect of our lives. Insurance companies are just like casinos in that the math always favours them if you look at a sufficiently large sample size. Even so, some things are still worth insuring. e.g. Your house. Most people do not have enough assets saved up to replace their house should it burn down. Even though your house will likely not burn down, protecting yourself against the loss of something you can't easily afford to replace is worth spending money on. Does it make sense to insure things you can replace though? Consider the "Instant product replacement" plans that stores constantly try to sell you. If your monitor dies you can easily absorb the cost of buying a new one. …

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 2

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

SO

Not uncommon for universities to self-insure. I don't know if they commonly reinsure, but I would assume they do.

Full original
DO

I think this profit-vs-non-profit thinking is reductionist. A non-profit insurer still has expenses. They have to pay their staff, rent offices, pay vendors, and so on. In fact, nothing stops them from spending more than a for-profit corporation would. Anyway, the math doesn't change: the insured still pay more than they are getting back.

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.