Singles, The Magazine for Today's Single

www.singlescenter.com

Sample article from Singles, The Magazine for Today's Single:

Singles: Unsure About Being Insured

Living the life of a single --it's carefree irresponsibility, isn't it? There are no serious repercussions for singles. It's only fair that singles are charged more for some types of insurance, because being single means living a life full of unnecessary risks that married people just don't take.

Does this argument sound absurd to you? Well it might, but lots of insurance companies use this logic as their reasoning for charging higher insurance rates for singles. Auto insurance providers are especially guilty of being biased against singles. Luckily, as you will soon see, recent provisions have actually provided a more single-friendly environment when it comes to such things as health insurance for singles. So, although singles may have it rough when it comes to motor vehicles, it could be possible that they are compensated elsewhere.

Let's talk about health insurance. The difference between the highest and lowest rate paid by employees at the same company for health insurance can now exceed two thousand dollars a year and is expected to widen sharply in coming years. The young, single, healthy employee may be benenfiting at the expense of the older worker who's spouse does not work and who has an illness in the family.

Many experts on health economics are troubled by such changes and argue that everyone should be charged the same for health insurance. The move away from universal rates will do nothing but benefit singles.

Uwe E. Reinhard, a professor of economy at Princeton says "It used to be that this nation said "We're all in this together and the healthy subsidize the sick, the young subsidize the old and so on. Now we are caving into an ethic that says sick people should pay higher premiums than healthy people and 'Why should I be forced to subsidize someone who is sick.'"

Some feel that the move away from universal rates has been reasonable because it makes workers more aware of the cost of medical expenses as well as making them more careful consumers. The one thing most definitely achieved by these new rates is a better reflection of individual cost to the insurance plan. So, singles are best accommodated by this system.Generally younger and in good health--singles will most likely be paying the smallest premiums possible unless they are ill or have had recent health problems. For older singles however, the situation is much grimmer as couples tend to outlive singles, and the rates reflect this factoid as well.

Rich Ostuw of TPF&C Consulting Firm states "Just as workers with a spouse and three kids expect to pay more for clothing and other expenses, their higher health insurance costs are increasingly being viewed as their responsibility as well." Now it looks likes younger singles will no longer be picking up the slack for married couples. Marrieds are being charged their fair share in health costs.

There are also certain benefits or programs that married people can choose to use when it comes to insurance. An employee covered by a working spouse's plan can choose not to take the insurance and instead receive a cash benefit such as more life insurance or extra vacation time. Healthy employees can choose the lowest expense plan, although they must then pay higher out of pocket payments. Also with lower expense plans, some things may not be covered such as psychiatric treatment or the cost of prescription medicine.

It all seems economically fair, but is it morally and economically feasible? Can society expect its sick, who are most likely unemployed, to pay higher rates? What will become of our ill? To put it more simply, who will take care of our elders.

Now let's take a look at the area of insurance where singles are really most discriminated against. Auto Insurance. What are the rates for singles? State Farm insurance charges a single male of nineteen $1354 for a six month premium while a married male of thirty-five will pay $440, quite a difference.

Despite what you may have heard, the three factors most likely to affect your rates do not include your marital status. They are age, driving record, and type of vehicle. Average miles driven a year and whether you drive a car for work or pleasure also affect premiums. In addition, female drivers tend to have slightly lower premiums than their male counterparts. And while yes, it is true that married folks do get lower premiums, the difference is slight.

While a married male of thirty-five will pay $440 for a six month premium, an unmarried male of that same age will pay $509, which while still a $69 difference, it is very slight compared to the figures given previously for a male of age nineteen. In this case, it still pays to be married, but not nearly as much as it does to be mature.

And what about the rates for single vs. married women? A single woman of forty will pay about $460 for a six month premium while a married woman of the same age will pay $412. As you can see, the difference between these two rates is much less than compared by age to a single woman of nineteen who will pay $803.

Certain perks allow certain discounts from insurance companies. For example, a car with and anti-lock brake system qualifies for about a 5 percent discount on rates for bodily injury and property damage liability regardless of your marital status. The same car also qualifies for a discount on no-fault coverages beacuse it has a passive restraint system. Older models of cars without such restraint systems may pay twenty to thirty percent more on their no fault premiums.

Lastly, before examining insurance rates, one must consider location. people who live in rural areas enjoy lower insurance rates than those who choose to live in cities or suburbs. The figures that I have just given you were taken from the rates used by Valley Park, Missouri, which may be lower than what many of you are experiencing presently.

What can you expect from the future of insurance rates? Well, one might consider insurance rates a mystery to the public. Who is responsible for deciding these rates?

Herb Hafif of the Los Angeles Times claims "Insurance is an industry built on marvelous accounting strategems that go by such magical names as 'IBNR Reserves'. This refers to claims incurred but not reported--which is to say, claims about which the company knows nothing. IBNR Reserves are often inflated by the insurance companies at tax time to eliminate even the slightest chance they'll have to pay any taxes--or lower their rates."

What would or should lower rates? Cutting the rights of victims of malpractice was tried--it didn't work. One might think that the billions in accumulated unspent funds from high rate premiums would have allowed rates to drop--it didn't. What about court congestion which puts off the day that insurance companies have to pay up? No such luck. The rates don't lower.

There is no logical way to justify high rates. But can they be justified for singles? Does the instant acquiring of a husband or wife suddenly decrease the pressure at which a once single person pushes down their gas pedal? I think not, and until the time when insurance companies take each case and driving record separately, regardless of marital status, singles will still be forced to reduce insurance costs for others at their own expense.