Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 05:54pm PT
|
Everybody knows you risk FAR more driving, smoking and not getting exercise than by being a climber.
If you are going to charge for insurance based on risk, better calculate all the risks and throw the old people out cause they don't climb but eat up all the benefits.
Wake up and take care of the society you belong to.
To do otherwise is to be a selfish bastard. Life is more than greed
Peace
Karl
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:02pm PT
|
Death Panel!!!
|
|
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:05pm PT
|
You betcha.
260 and counting fast. Who will be the poster to go down in infamy?
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:07pm PT
|
I'm cooling down the sparkling cider!
|
|
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:10pm PT
|
Laughing at MY narrow view CC. I may need glasses but I don't wear blinders.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:11pm PT
|
Just heard that an expansion project for Highway 215 (a major freeway artery in So. Cal.) has been approved and is scheduled to begin. It is expected to directly employ at least a thousand people in an area that has a 14% unemployment rate, and was one of the most affected areas in the recent housing collapse
It is one of the largest Stimulus Package (ARRA) project to be funded and started thusfar.
http://www.myvalleynews.com/story/40614/
Hey, TGT- did your company get a piece of that? No? Would your opinion of the Stimulus Package and Obama change, even if you did? I doubt that very seriously.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:15pm PT
|
"Everybody knows you risk FAR more driving, smoking and not getting exercise than by being a climber."
You must have lost fewer friends climbing than I -- at least with regard to driving. I've known many more climbers killed climbing than I've known people of all persuasions killed in automobile accidents.
As for higher rates for older people -- check life insurance rates for older people sometime. They're rather expensive -- as they should be.
Again, I was able to get my "climbing surcharge" down to practically nothing. My own experience suggests that most insurance companies that charge the same for all activities they consider "ultrahazardous' are simply too lazy to want the business. Shop around, and you can usually do just fine (well, unless you really are doing crazy things).
I think that climbing organizations (yes, I know that's an oxymoron) should be able to compile plenty of data showing the risk of death per climber/day, and end up with rational rates for members as a result. I know that for decades, the European national climbing organizations were the providers of rescue insurance for Alpine ascents.
Frankly, this doesn't strike me as a partisan issue, except that certain Democrats think the way to get something is to have the government order someone else to give it to them. We don't have enough votes for the political parties to care about us. Our best bet is probably through the climbing organizations as outlined above.
John
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:16pm PT
|
"260 and counting fast. Who will be the poster to go down in infamy?"
There's so many posts that could be deleted or disappeared for many reasons that the real 10,000 post will never be settled. Give it up
Could be a mark of shame anyway. How'd you like to be Wilt Chamberlain's 10,000 post-game rebound?
Peace
Karl
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:17pm PT
|
"If you are going to charge for insurance based on risk, better calculate all the risks and throw the old people out cause they don't climb but eat up all the benefits."
Karl Baba
___
Old folks should be covered over everyone because they can't care for themselves and spent a whole life time putting to the system.
Except maybe climbers?
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
A survey where 68% preferred this Fuca over others
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:18pm PT
|
I think the insurance industry would say those are reasons they shouldn't be covered.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:19pm PT
|
Me to Norton: "You and several other posters (including the initial one on this thread) assume that tea party protesters are either right-wing or Republicans. Most I've talked to are neither. They're populists who've had it with both parties, and demonstrate why I mistrust populism."
Norton to me:
"Nope, Tea Parties are 100% right wing in origin and promotion:"
My statement was about tea party proptesters I've talked to. I don't see how you can contradict that statement without talking to the same people I've talked to. I rather doubt that you've done that.
John
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:19pm PT
|
"You must have lost fewer friends climbing than I -- at least with regard to driving. I've known many more climbers killed climbing than I've known people of all persuasions killed in automobile accidents. "
You are still young. I know more climbers who have died or racked up bills due to driving than climbing. We're not talking about life insurance either, it's about the health of society.
You're still not old yet. People rack up most of their medical bills in late life and you know it. If a climber dies climbing, it actually saves society money in the long run
Peace
Karl
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:27pm PT
|
"I think that climbing organizations (yes, I know that's an ozymoron) should be able to compile plenty of data showing the risk of death per climber/day, and end up with rational rates for members as a result."
There are data sets available- the most familiar to climbers being the AAC/ANAM, but they are very incomplete- they are based on voluntary contributions, and there isn't much clear data on how many actual climbers exist in the first place. Outdoor Industry Associations (such as, well, the OIA) have been working at this for some time now, but it is a work in progress, and has still not had much impact on the the much, much greater (nay, gargantuan) insurance industry.
Likewise, within the outdoor/adventure education/guiding industry, there are several professional associations (Association for Experiential Education) and institutions (NOLS, Outward Bound) that have been gathering data for some time now- AEE's incident gathering system is voluntary, and is therefore incomplete like the AAC, and while OB/NOLS's incident reporting systems are comprehensive, they only gather data from their programs.
Your experience with your policy was likely based on a policy that was underwritten by a company that interprets the actual risk in a manner different than another company. Key word there: interprets- that's about the best they can do at this point, and it results in rates and policies that are very inconsistent.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:37pm PT
|
I don't know how you can complain about possible higher insurance costs for climbers.
If accident rates are actually higher for climbers than for others, charging climbers the same would be just another form of socialism. The many carrying the few.
If the accident rates are no different you still can't complain. Charging someone who needs something, all that they can possibly afford to pay - that's Capitalism.
That's good.
Now for a bit of truth. Parents provide something in addition to financial support. You are willing to risk leaving your child without all the other things they need?
Really?
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:38pm PT
|
John, you would laugh and call my logic contorted if I
told you that I personally talked to people who were at a
Tea Party and they all told me that Glen Beck and Fox News
were behind them showing up.
You would point out that using a personal example to reference
a national happening would be very poor form, statistically.
So, I don't doubt at all your personal conversations.
However, they have nothing to do with the intent, the origin,
and who the driving force is behind Tea Parties.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:41pm PT
|
Let's be clear: this insurance discussion began as a result of cchopper's excerpt from either one of the bills in Congress or Obama's plan (I'm actually guessing here), which is related to health insurance and corresponding rates.
A spinoff of this became the issue of life insurance, which John & I have been engaging in. While both types of insurance require some similar data to set rates, there are distinct differences, too.
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 06:47pm PT
|
The Presidents idea of saving money by making health care
more efficient is a good one.
Implementation is the tricky part.
One unsolvable/unworkable option is how
to stop the elderly from requiring
so much 'care' the
last 6 months of their lives.
Waterloo has happened for The President. Its all over but counting the political corpses.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 07:03pm PT
|
You still don't get it do you Corniss?
It's not about you hoping Obama "fails".
It is about Obama and the congress debating and attempting to
come to agreement on meaningful, and needed, healthcare reform.
But, judging by your comment Corniss, we can see that you,
like the official leader of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh,
publicly want Obama to "fail".
Screw what is best for the American people, and yourself Corniss,
what is really important is for you to "believe" Obama failed "somehow".
And they wonder why they can only win elections in bible belt states. And they really don't care if they ever win another national election anywhere else. They gotta be "pure".
And most important, do NOT have the balls to renounce their own
extreme right wing, who is killing the GOP's future chances.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 07:09pm PT
|
News Flash: Corniss's doctor supports the Public OPTION
A new study finds that a majority of physicians support the creation of a public health care option.
A Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) study published in Monday's New England Journal of Medicine shows that 63 percent of physicians support a health reform proposal that includes both a public option and traditional private insurance. If the additional 10 percent of doctors who support an entirely public health system are included, then approximately three out of four physicians nationwide support inclusion of a public option. Only 27 percent support a private-only reform that would provide subsidies for low-income individuals to purchase private insurance.
Surveying a nationally representative sample of 2,130 physicians across America, researchers Salomeh Keyhani, M.D., M.P.H., and Alex Federman, M.D., M.P.H., from Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City queried physicians about a range of options for expanding health insurance coverage.
"There should be no confusion about where doctors stand in the debate over expanding health insurance coverage: they want reform," said Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "This survey reveals important information about the perspective of physicians on issues central to the health reform debate. Policy makers should listen to their doctors."
"We found that no matter how you sliced the data, physicians demonstrated majority support for a public health insurance option, regardless of their type of practice or where they live," said Keyhani.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 07:12pm PT
|
somebody nuke this thread already. jeebus.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!