@SaulGoodStocks@0xMerp@0xglowie 1. He’s saying they owe it to themselves not anyone else
2. It’s true, life is short and you could die today/tomorrow unexpectedly and in hindsight would’ve wished you found the fullness of the beauty in your existence
3. I’ve worked plenty of these jobs
@AladinKumar1@CoffeeBlackMD as far as i understand it's often not clear to the nursing home until after they have taken the patient in. then they can't release them from care until they have already crossed a line, which exposes them to workers' comp and employer's liability claims.
@AladinKumar1@CoffeeBlackMD maybe if there existed a solution for this problem. do you expect nursing homes to incur the cost of researching and developing the solution to this?
@AliceFromQueens@RandyNeu People are going to hate hearing this but there’s a similar situation wrt mold. It’s a lot easier to clean up and a lot less damaging to health (unless you already have an immune deficiency or other related health problems) than the plaintiffs bar would make one think.
@SethBorman@_its_not_real_ I know this isn’t really exactly what you’re asking but commercial auto has been this way in the US. Largely unprofitable as a standalone LOB, CR exceeding 100% for every year of the past decade except 2021. It “makes money” when it brings in other profitable LOBs.
@nickjcannata@SteveSkojec@JamesSharp77 No my point is why does the government need to provide homeowners insurance in that scenario. If they provide police and fire, a private market will be willing to provide insurance at lower cost.
@nickjcannata@SteveSkojec@JamesSharp77 Separately, the program can still be economically or politically or logistically viable in the sense that it partially enables trade to continue, *in addition* to whatever defense capabilities exist. If the defense capabilities exist, why need the insurance program?
@nickjcannata@SteveSkojec@JamesSharp77 I don't underwrite this product but I imagine the maritime transportation insurance program is not priced to contemplate wartime risk. If they did, it would be cost prohibitive at such a time. The program is destined to lose money from this fact alone.
@JamesSharp77@knowles204@RealBriansDad@SteveSkojec Probably should have considered this and planned for it better. Just cuz you’re in a shit situation now as a result doesn’t mean “doing something” is the right approach or likely to make things better.
@knowles204@RealBriansDad@SteveSkojec@JamesSharp77 Probably not. I think it’s dumb, in case my post wasn’t clear. But I think it’s worth separating the profitability argument from other forms of viability. It won’t be profitable (I would bet my life savings on it) but it could theoretically still be viable in other ways.
@adam_aerosol@nickcammarata Yeah and fair play to you for being willing to admit that. Most don’t even let their brains think that far when the topic is insurance
@adam_aerosol@nickcammarata The alternative is that these “models”/underwriting approaches are shared or open, which kills competition in the marketplace. This subsequently kills innovation in the marketplace, which drives loss ratios up over time as the world changes.