X-Message-Number: 9758 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 21:44:58 -0800 From: American Cryonics Society <> Subject: self insurance Jim Yount said: >>Presently, self insurance would divert so much time and energy away from >>other activities, that it is not a good idea. When societies have >>membership bases of thousands of people, not hundreds, we can consider >>this strategy. To which Borys Wrobel (in Message #9752) wrote: >Thats what I suspected, frankly, but my question is then, would not a >self-insurance scheme bring up the number of members and make the effort >worthwhile? Reply: The insurance companies do a pretty good job of pricing their produce to produce a small per-policy profit, and to properly account for mortality and the cost of money. I don't think we could save enough through self insurance to make much difference in recruitment. However, many people may not be aware that they can pay a relatively small amount to an insurance company (up-front) and be covered for a lifetime. Your post helped call attention to that fact. Perhaps we should publicize (on our web pages and elsewhere) various cryonic suspension payment plans. One of the myths that negatively impacts enrollment is that cryonics is so expensive it is just affordable to the rich. Long life, Jim Yount =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+American Cryonics Society (650)254-2001 FAX (650)967-4444 P.O. Box 1509 Cupertino, CA 95015 =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9758