Leave a Comment:
6 comments
I tot all sinkies already know … this is the application of normal kia su, kia si, and selfishness (aka profit motive, self-centred, maximise benefits) by the civil service and pappies. All sinkies should already know this since all sinkies also got these 3 traits after 55 years. Nothing to be surprised about.
ReplyOk, I’ll try to summarise as much as I can. Firstly, incurred loss ratio reserving method is suitable only for yearly renewable insurance i.e. motor insurance etc. In fact, a more accurate measurement should be ultimate loss ratio (i.e. incurred + IBNR). Hence, it is unsuitable for Medishield Life. Medishield Life reserve, like any other guaranteed renewable insurance, should be estimated by discounting future cashflows with the appropriate probabilities applied to each cashflow.
The CAR ratio of 200% is too much for a few reasons: (1) It’s very much higher than the minimum of 120% (2) unlike the private insurer’s insurance funds, Medishield Life is (implicitly) backed by the government and so there is really no need to have that much of a buffer. Incidentally, the 20% of the 120% is already a buffer. Imho, 150% CAR ratio should be sufficient for Medishield Life.
ReplyHi Aik Meng,
I think there is no good way of determining the 30%. Either it becomes too complicated (and difficult to enforce) or it’s too simple (and unfair). That’s why I suggested it should taken care of by the government.
http://www.martinlee.sg/medishield-life-determine-unhealthy/
ReplyNow which group warrant a 30% extra premium for 10 years ?
1) Currently on dialysis but not on any medical plan
2) On the medishield plan for many years and dialysis claim almost reaching the current medishield limit
3) On the plan for the past 10 years with HBP excluded (no claims yet)
4) On the plan for the past 10 years with HBP excluded (already developed into serious condition)
5) Someone who prefer to self insured himself (and not to sign up for any medical plan ) but got HBP lately.
6) Someone who prefer to self insured himself (and not to sign up for any medical plan ) but got heart attack lately.
Who is going to be the underwriter to decide on the 30% extra for 10 years ?
ReplyAik Meng,
“Who is going to be the underwriter to decide on the 30% extra for 10 years ?”
Looks like an army of underwriters are required. Job openings.. *hint* *hint*.
ReplyA existing policyholder under IP is excluded for HBP.
So existing CPF medishield is likely to exclude this condition too.
Now CPF medishield life is going to include such condition with or without the 30% extra premium for 10 years.This group of PH is very likely going to claim much more and use up more of the surplus/ reserve when HBP complication arises in the future.
The claims for this group due to HBP is suppose to be paid by the government perpetually up to medishield life limit (with the 30% extra premium for 10 years and government funding for the unhealthy group. But how to draw a clearly define line down the road so that their claims will not eat into the surplus/ reserve of the healthy group ?
During the feedback session, I have proposed keep the existing plan as it is to be underwritten by IP insurer, Whatever not claimable or excluded by IP provider to be paid separately by the government from another fund. This move will surely reduce the premium of the new medishield life.
However the government just prefer to camouflage everything into one fund and eventually everyone pay much more so as to subsidise the unhealthy. …..
Reply