SS and Sex

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumquat You guys are too young, I thought it WWII porn.

Good one!

[MooreBonds]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp On topic, it does seem that more and more countries are banning price discrimination on the basis of gender or other characteristics. The only form of discrimination that seems to be legal anymore is smoking vs non-smoking. It seems make the insurance companies job easier but also harder to make money.

Hmmm....I'll agree with the "makes it more difficult to earn money", but I would argue that it makes the insurance companies' jobs much more difficult. Before, you could figure out the statistical averages of male/female life expectancy (to pick one example), and price accordingly.

Now, by allowing just one price, the insurer must constantly keep a check on their inventory of # of policies of men/women. Underwrite too many men for car insurance (for example), and you're exposing yourself to too much risk. But then, how do you risk adjust your portfolio to lower it down by bringing in more female drivers? You can't cut your prices to attract more younger women (less risky drivers), because when you drop the price, you might attract more younger men (higher risk), and end up with an even riskier insurance portfolio!

It's almost like once a company gets stuck with a topheavy load of risk with one product/pool, they're stuck there and can't use price discrimination to equalize their risk out.

If you have to offer one price irrespective of gender, and you end up selling too many annuities to women (longevity risk increases), how do you adjust your business to bring in more men (shorter life expectancy) to balance out your longevity risk? About the only way is to market heavily in areas that men might see your ads! And even that is not 'guaranteed' to adjust your insurance pool risk. Not really an efficient situation to force the insurers into, IMO.

I suppose they could engage in re-insurance to spread out their risk...but just seems to needlessly complicate matters with the guise of being 'non-discriminatory'.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp I am so happy to hear that I am not the only pervert on the boards.

Heck, if you are not a pervert, you don't belong here!

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amethyst I guess this explains why the last form I filled out, asked me to state my "Gender." (Which people don't actually possess; but it's apparently better than folks going, "Heh-heh, that form says SEX, heh-heh.")

Yeah, because when they use the word "gender" you have to answer "male" or "female" instead of "yes, please"....

[photoguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MooreBonds If you have to offer one price irrespective of gender, and you end up selling too many annuities to women (longevity risk increases), how do you adjust your business to bring in more men (shorter life expectancy) to balance out your longevity risk? About the only way is to market heavily in areas that men might see your ads! And even that is not 'guaranteed' to adjust your insurance pool risk. Not really an efficient situation to force the insurers into, IMO.

It does seem somewhat problematic but the gap between male/female life expectancy drops as we get older. At age 60 the gap is 3 years (20.9 vs 24) and 2.3 by 70 (13.7 vs 16) according to the census. So if the company "splits the difference" the amount of mispricing might small enough to be tolerable.

On the other hand, as a percentage of remaining life, the gap appears to be roughly 15-20% after one hits 60 ( http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...es/12s0105.pdf ).

Maybe the lesson will be if you are in a couple always have the woman buy the annuity and single men will tend to be the ones who lose?

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photoguy (snip)...single men will tend to be the ones who lose?

Uh - sounds "normal" to me ...

[W2R]

When I read the title of this thread, I don't think of the same nasty things you pervs think of.

I visualize a sweet old couple, married for half a century or so, looking forward to getting their monthly SS disbursements. On that day, when they both see that they have them, they are so thrilled that they hug one another in glee and dissolve into a sweet, legal, gentle, inoffensive session of, er, "marital bliss".

Thus SS and Sex....

[Nords]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB I have to admit some disappointment. After reading the thread title I was expecting to find a thread about a senior sex-for-benefits scandal at the SSA or something about granny porn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R When I read the title of this thread, I don't think of the same nasty things you pervs think of.

Heck, I was afraid we'd have to pay for it...

If only there was some way for the title of the thread to be changed to "Social Security benefits versus gender"! But, nah, we probably don't have the technology or the labor to make it happen.

[gauss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MooreBonds If you have to offer one price irrespective of gender, and you end up selling too many annuities to women (longevity risk increases), how do you adjust your business to bring in more men (shorter life expectancy) to balance out your longevity risk? About the only way is to market heavily in areas that men might see your ads! And even that is not 'guaranteed' to adjust your insurance pool risk. Not really an efficient situation to force the insurers into, IMO.

In the US, I think it is legal and common to use sex-based pricing on individual annuities.

Private sector pensions, on the other hand, are prohibited from discreminating based on sex.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords Heck, I was afraid we'd have to pay for it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords If only there was some way for the title of the thread to be changed to "Social Security benefits versus gender"! But, nah, we probably don't have the technology or the labor to make it happen.

Nah, probably not, unless the OP lets us know that he wants it changed, in which case any mod/admin can change it for him. Besides, we are having such fun with the title as is.

[ejman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R Nah, probably not, unless the OP lets us know that he wants it changed, in which case any mod/admin can change it for him. Besides, we are having such fun with the title as is.

I kinda like the little as is, the thread has taken some interesting side tours but if the mod/admin feel it should be changed by all means do so. It's good to know however that judging by the number of posters sex wins over wine. All is well at ER.org

[W2R]

Seems fine to me, too, Ejman. We're having a lot of fun with it.

[Moemg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R . I visualize a sweet old couple, married for half a century or so, looking forward to getting their monthly SS disbursements. . Thus SS and Sex....

That sweet old couple are 62 or 66 so they were married at 12 ? Good for them for staying together!

[Alan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejman I kinda like the little as is, the thread has taken some interesting side tours but if the mod/admin feel it should be changed by all means do so. It's good to know however that judging by the number of posters sex wins over wine. All is well at ER.org

People love to wine about sex.

[NW-Bound]

I dunno. At this writing, this "SS and Sex" thread has 35 posts including this one I am writing. The "SS and Wine" has 26 posts. However, this thread readership is at 1022, while the other leads at 1211. It could be because the other thread predates this one, so only time will tell.

Now, as a study of forum readers and posters, how about starting up another thread called "SS and Bacon"?

Then, "Sex and Wine"? "Wine and Bacon"? And then, "Sex and Ba...". No, I'd better stop.

[ejman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan People love to wine about sex.

I dunno about that but the two certainly seem to make a fine combination.

As an aside, it's kind of interesting that as the years have gone by and seniorhood approaches (hell it's here!) many couples that have made it thru the difficult years of developing and maintaining a career, kids etc etc seem to kind of settle into a contented world where the subject matter is a very important and comforting part. Hell, for prior generations it was either never talked about or it just seemed to go into oblivion (or maybe that's what we youngsters thought). Anyway - way off topic. But I liked W2R's dream couple sequence.

[frayne]

I have a friend that still refers to a bottle of wine as "panty remover".