X-Message-Number: 12910
From: "John de Rivaz" <>
References: <>
Subject: Re: self-funding insurance
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 11:14:46 -0000

Life insurance where cryonics organisations get those large profits is a
nice idea, but sorry, the lawyers won't allow it without a lot of trouble
and expense.

Annuities organised by cryonics organisations would be nice as well -
[Annuities are where elderly people can transfer their assets to an annuity
organisation and get paid an income for life and the capital remaining
reverts to the annuity organisation when they die]. But the same objection
applies to making the cryonics organisation and the annuity organisation the
same.

Theoretically you could, when you retire, liquidate all your capital, pay
gains taxes, and then buy an annuity with part of the remains and transfer
the rest of the remains to your suspension fund. But the figures just don't
add up - you would be considerably worse off than keeping your assets as
they are and drawing down capital as income when needed.

Some pension plans make it compulsory for the proceeds to be paid partly as
an annuity - you can't get out of it. It is galling to see that the income
you get is little more than you could get on the ordinary stock market where
you could bequeath the capital to your cryonics organisation instead of the
annuity company.

--
Sincerely, John de Rivaz
my homepage links to Longevity Report, Fractal Report, my singles club for
people in Cornwall, music, Inventors' report, an autobio and various other
projects:       http://geocities.yahoo.com/longevityrpt


----- Original Message ----- >
> Message #12901
> Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 12:19:58 -0500
> From: gary tripp <>
> Subject: self-funding insurance
>
> What are the prospects for setting up a non-profit insurance scheme
> for cryonicists. We could employ something akin to universl life where
> premiums would go into an investment fund. A portion of the investment
> returns would be used to pay the "cost" of insurance. We could mandate
> that most of the money be used in concervative investments but with a
> small portion for investment in life-extension related ventures
> where there is an exptected commercial return. At some point the returns
> would be sufficient to reduce future premiums provided that the initial
> premiums were high enough. With appropriate safeguards (regular audits)
> the only issue would be insurance viability. Has anyone done the math?
>
> /gary

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12910