I suppose that my point is that the initial premise is not supported, that is, that insurance has never really been inherently socialist.
That premise really does not hold if you consider those who were the underwriters in the case of Lloyd's Coffee shop. Those people were indeed investors who had the means and basically gambled that a maritime shipment would make it to the port of destination.
I would suppose they were a bit like the bookie of today taking bets on a football game. These investors took into consideration the experience of the captain, first mate and the crew of a particular voyage, knowing the track records of the people involved..... having at least some idea of how well that crew might fare if they had to deal with piracy, when the voyage would take place, weather conditions and such.
These underwriters would base their decisions on how much of the risk they were willing to cover and at what rate based on these facts and likely statistical information on past voyages to determine rates for said coverage.
This is what I elude to as the beginnings of what we refer to as insurance today. If you think about it, one could imagine that there were likely more moneyed people looking for an investment than there were actual shipment to insure. Therefore, there were less risks to pool than there were folks willing to underwrite such risks.
The issue of health insurance is admittedly out of my scope of expertise but I will give you that one of the main problems with traditional insurance plans is that you don't really get to read and study them before you buy them. Further, the agent who sells them, I have found, don't really know these policies well enough to explain them properly.
Add to this obscurity, most folks who buy them never read them and therein lies the confusion and the essence of why people feel they didn't get what they thought they were buying.
I can't really recall how many times an insured thought I was being less than fair, called his agent to complain about it and I'd have to explain the policy provisions to the agent. Because the agent didn't explain the policy to the insured properly initially, differences of policy interpretations arise.
I see logtroll's premise as if he believes healthcare should be not for profit and should be socialized. I'm sure there are many who agree with him, even I myself don't disagree with this idea but I also submit that I'm not certain that it's the best thing for America at this point in time.
In closing I still maintain that what the initial post and Mr. Troll's premise is not really insurance but socialized healthcare.
@ logtroll:
I read your post regarding rate classifications and my information indicates that you are correct that you or your WC carrier really has no way of knowing what the actual premium will be at the beginning of the year and that is why the insurer will base your premium deposit on previous years.
The rates determined per classification are multiplied per $100 in payroll. At the end of a given year you would receive either a credit for unused premium or a bill for amounts owed if you had a busy year. Depending on the insurer they may require you to report payroll earnings either quarterly of bi-annually.
@ Ardy:
I take no offense at these postings with regard to my profession, I am quite accustomed to folks not being fully aware if their policy coverages, exclusions, endorsements and limitations. There are not many average people who actually read the policies they buy.
