Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smallnamespace 620 days ago
> What's wrong with just letting the premium take care of it?

Offering a deal that nobody honest would take is a waste of time for everyone involved.

2 comments

Walking back from the pillow analogy a bit, I'd happily pay for homeowner's insurance that also covered lost wages, a temporary rental place, legal fees, and the other incidentals likely to arise in a fire or flood (as opposed to paying whatever high deductible I'm comfortable with on top of those other large, unknown costs). Adding those to the policy would necessarily go beyond the home value. Is that level of excess allowed?
> Offering a deal that nobody honest would take is a waste of time for everyone involved.

I'm not suggesting any insurer should be forced to offer a deal. They're welcome to just shrug and tell you to pound sand. What I don't see is the logic behind having an international code prohibiting the offering of such deals. Is the international code trying to dictate to the insurance company what is worth their time?

The international code is also defining the key distinguishing factor of insurance: it makes the insured whole against a risk that they actually have.

There are ways to bet on things where you don’t have that underlying risk: gambling, derivatives markets, prediction markets, etc.

These aren’t insurance and aren’t regulated as such.