Didn't Trump's EO on 1/20/17 kill the individual mandate?

"the IRS, citing Trump’s executive order, said it would no longer require taxpayers to declare their coverage status on their tax forms"

Citing Trump's Order, IRS Stops Enforcing Individual Mandate for Health Insurance

I think you and everyone else misunderstood my point. If you look at the monthly insurance premiums you pay, then deduct the amount actually paid out to you by insurers when you make a claim, you will realize you are paying in way more than you are getting out of it. That's why insurance companies exist. They make money off of consumers' fear and bad math skills. And they make a lot of it!

Statistically speaking, you would be far better off financially if you took the money you paid on insurance premiums and put it in a savings account to draw from if ever you needed to.

Not sure. The 330 day limit gave me motivation to explore going without US-based insurance.

However, once I decided to continue with US insurance, the it wouldn't matter if there were two reasons not to have insurance than only one reason.

LMAO! My open heart surgery hospital stay and attendant costs like surgeon fees was WAY more than the premiums paid and my out of pocket cost, the latter of which was was $10 for the phone in the room.

Got more out of my insurance when I broke my collar bone back in 2012, when I was actually paying premiums.

And as noted above, I currently don't pay a dime for health insurance and haven't for several years.

As for HO insurance, I have paid less than $10,000 in premiums over the 12 years I have owned my home. If it burns down tonight you think I will be at a loss?

Moreover, just think of how much more you would be out of pocket without insurance. Talk about trouble with maths.

You must be poor, and have few assets that are actually worth anything, including your health.

Our health insurance system here in Australia is a little different and cheaper than the US, but it still provides private cover that for me has saved us around $15,000 in medical expenses in the past three or four surgeries.

Someone can only say the math is bad when their annual earnings are worth more than their assets, and that they can afford to self-insure.

If you earn only $75,000 a year and the house you and the bank own is worth $350,000, and it is destroyed... and your house and contents insurance premium is $1,000 a year, for the 20 years or so you might live in the house... yes, I see where the math might be bad.

To bring this back to touring, there are many stories of Australians going overseas and then facing huge debts for medical treatment (because, you know, serious medical conditions require stabilisation and treatment in public hospitals for more than a day, and maybe up to six weeks, at maybe $3,000 a day), and then repatriation... and if there is a serious medical issue involved, that means having medical assistance fly with you. I think $15,000 is just a starting point. Even a dead body may need returning to the country of residence.

The last travel insurance premium I paid to cover Machka and me for our month-ling trip to Canada (North America, so it automatically was the most expensive) was $295 base, then another $175 for special coverage for DVT because Machka is susceptible to it. Otherwise, claims could be refused if there was any inkling that DVT was the cause of a medical problem.

We didn't have to lodge a claim. But refer back to Machka's unexpected bout with DVT. I've always traveled with insurance and always will.

Because I know the math does actually add up in my favour.

(PS: I find it usually doesn't for young people who consider themselves invincible/indestructable).

I don't even have to have quote open heart surgery. My costs are under $100 a month for health insurance, and while I don't pretend to know what it costs my employer, a single 3 month supply of one of my two insulins runs north of $3000. If I am in a car crash in which my insurer has to pay out, my limits are far in excess of what I will ever pay into it. As indyfabz mentioned, have one catastrophic health incident, and see where your cost-benefit ratio ends up, or ask all the folks in Texas and Florida how saving money by not having flood insurance is going to end up working out for them.

You do the math. Insurance is to keep you from financial ruin when something bad happens. It is folks like you who are likely screaming the loudest for help the second your cost savings blows up in your face.

Anecdotal evidence does not trump statistics. I'm sorry you were in poor health, and I'm glad your insurance helped you. But statistically speaking, people pay way more in premiums than they receive from claims.

And as for the argument "If it burns down tonight you think I will be at a loss?" You just made my point. If your house burns down. But it hasn't. And chances are it won't.

Again, statistically speaking, one would be far better off financially by taking their insurance premium costs and putting them into a savings account and drawing from it only when needed. That is a fact. Whether or not you enjoy the peace of mind that insurance brings or you have anecdotal experience with having to claim your insurance is irrelevant.

You do realise we're talking about travel insurance here ... right???

Please cite a credible source for your assertion.

And some of those premiums go to people who choose not to purchase health insurance. Are you one of those people?

In the end, I am glad I had and have it. It saved me from serious financial trouble.

sadistically speaking.....the topic is TRAVEL insurance.
short-term coverage, normally a few weeks to a few months.
often includes some special stuff for travelers:

*lost/stolen luggage
*missed flight reimbursement
*resumption of journey...covers flight to/from home for emergencies/funerals
*credit card fraud coverage
*rental car excess
*personal liability
*alternate transportation
*accommodation and emergency travel
*overseas emergency medical services
*repatriation of remains and funeral arrangements
*and a really, really, really big one.....air evac....upwards of $50K

only cost a couple hundred bucks or so, and most people won't need it.
but when you need it, you NEED it.

so like mom use to say......better get insurance,
cause if you fall off your bike and break a leg,
don't come runnin' to me!

There is no question that insurance companies collect more in premiums than they pay out in claims. I googled for a source and this is the first one returned, pegging the margin roughly at 5%.

So, on average, you'll get less than you put in. BUT, as individuals we live only one life and cannot predict how it'll turn out. Insurance is about risk aversion. A prudent person will happily pay a 5% penalty to avoid the risk of being bankrupt by an unfortunate health problem.

It is sometimes not so clever to purchase insurance if you can easily assume the risk (ex for a used car). It is sometimes foolish not to purchase coverage because the cost of a catastrophe will wipe you out forever, or because you end up shifting the risks on an innocent third party (liability insurance).

The gold standard is Global Rescue.

Yeah I checked out OHIP and basically anything that would be worthwhile to get the insurance for is not covered by OHIP so I opted to get the insurance. I went with Escapade travel insurance, they are based out of Quebec and are a subsidiary of Allianz (a US company). I read through there exclusions before purchasing it only mentioned

None of which seemed to apply to my situation. For those wondering it was $87, covers up to $5 million including air transport or boat transport, private rooms, etc. Was quite a good policy from the looks of it. Also no deductible.

Thanks for the advice all, although I do not foresee myself having to use it I do think its probably a good thing to have. Also i'm an economist and definitely understand the fallacy of getting insurance, but this isn't a Car, TV or a phone this is my life and betting against life just seems like a dumb idea IMO.

I think there is something to that for insurance on things you can afford to cover. I really don't see paying to cover things like your airfare. Just maybe if it is a very expensive ticket for a once in a lifetime trip that really broke your budget, I could see it.

When ever I have had to cancel a flight they allowed me a credit to fly later (not a refund). I was always fine with that, despite usually having to use it within one year. The credit always applied despite my buying the cheapest non-refundable ticket. In any case I am pretty sure I have saved enough by not buying insurance thus far to cover any non-refunded cancellation that might come up. My trips have all been in the continental US though.

I tend to plan my expenses and gear choices so that I can afford to cover any theft or loss of gear/bike/whatever. I ride a bike and gear that I can afford to replace without too much pain. It really avoids a lot of worry to know that if all of my gear was stolen I could continue a long tour by picking up new stuff locally. It may be less than ideal stuff, but I can't see myself being unable to continue a long trip because of gear loss or theft. Short trips would be another matter, but washing out on a 1 week tour would be much less of a big deal.

Health insurance is another matter. I can see someone wanting to be sure they are covered for lengthy foreign travel if their regular coverage won't cover it.

How does Allianz ( a German company ) define "d) High-risk activities"?

Couldn't agree more! With the exception of travel in the United States. I'll bite the bullet and get travel insurance for the USA leg of my trip but from Mexico on, forget it.

I absolutely disagree. We are talking about TRAVEL INSURANCE, not long term life insurance. Depending on the type of trip it can be a one time payment covering just the trip.

Case in point...Last May I had a trip planned for late May with a ACA. It cost me about $1,100.00. I purchased the travel insurance for around $110.00. As it turned out, I had an accident in early May and suffered two fractured ribs, a concussion and the requisite road rash. Since the trip was self contained with about 150 miles on dirt and gravel, I had to cancel. "Statistically speaking", paying $110.00 to get a $1,100.00 refund is good math to me and certainly putting that $110.00 in the bank wouldn't grow to $1,100.00 in my lifetime.

Second case on point (Non-cycling but...) A few years ago my dad (in his 90's) had a slip and fall and died. He had been taken to a hospital in Florida by helicopter and was then transported to New York for burial. Without insurance, the total cost would have been in excess of $100,000 (helicopter evacuation, care in hospital, transport to New York and burial). With insurance it was zero. "Statistically speaking", I hope your bank account is bigger than mine. I also sincerely hope that you never have serious problems and ride safely forever.

Last June I cycled the Normandy and Brittany coast of France. The ride was paved and my ribs were 90% healed so I was able to go. If the healing process had been delayed, paying around $450.00 in insurance would have saved me around $4,500.00. Furthermore, I can't imagine what services and costs would have been were I to have been severely injured or died oversees and needed services similar to those that my father received. I'm happier to pay a little and have peace of mind, knowing that my kids aren't burdened by my misfortune. I choose what is important to me and everyone else can choose what is important to them.

Like someone said previously, if you don't have it and nothing happens, it may seem like wasted money; but if you do need it, it's great to have.

As described by this article I feel don’t fall under it. Bungee jumping, hang gliding, etc..

https://https://www.allianztravelinsu...-insurance.htm

That is probably true because most people are lucky and do not have to file a claim. And a small number will receive way more than they pay in because they have a large claim. The purpose of an insurance policy is to cover the cost of an expensive unanticipated event.

A couple years ago I was on a guided bike tour. The guide was living out of his Chevy van because he was flat broke. He had a back injury several years earlier (he bicycled off of a cliff) and filed medical bankruptcy because his medical costs were over a quarter million $USD. I am not sure how many years that he had been living in a Chevy van or how many more years he was going to have to, but basically any income he got over and above a small amount was being pulled out of his pay checks to pay down his debts.

I have health insurance, when I travel out of the country I buy travel insurance that includes medical, condo insurance on my condo (similar to a renters policy) and I have insurance on my truck in case I hit someone or am hit by an uninsured driver. But, I do not have collision insurance on my truck, so if I hit something and total my 2003 truck, I am out the value of a 14 year old truck.

Do I consider myself bad at math? No, not when I have degrees in Economics and Geological Engineering, it would be hard to obtain those professional degrees if I was bad at math.

On that, in my situation ...

I spent 2 weeks in hospital with DVT + Dr + ultrasounds and numerous other tests, etc.

This is Australia, so it wouldn't have been a quarter of a million, but I know it was well over $10,000.

Each time I get travel insurance, I pay something in the neighbourhood of $100/month. Since 2003, I've probably paid out for approx. 22 months of travel, for a grand total of approx. $2200.

Considering I've paid out approx. $2200 ... and my insurance has paid for at least $10,000 worth of expenses .... my math tells me the insurance has been a pretty good deal.

Even if the amount I paid out for travel insurance was double or triple, the insurance would still be a pretty good deal.

how you "feel" doesn't determine the payout.

you are allowed to contact the carrier directly.
ask them, rather than guess on a forum, whether cycling is covered.
print off the email response and keep a copy.


(ir)regardless, in most cases, they would cover "normal" sporting
activities, but disallow dangerous/high risk and competition.

*riding a bike/cycle touring....yes.
*participating in a registered race.....probably not, but maybe.
*attempting to jump springfield gorge..........no.

That's the lottery, actually. The lottery is a special tax on people who are ignorant of probability. Anyway...

Late last year there was a horror story, of sorts, that was posted on FB and reposted on the Han River Riders page.

Very briefly, an Australian national was cycling in Korea, on a tandem, and collided with a Korean national who was injured pretty seriously. The details are somewhat confused, and the story is incomplete, but bottom line the Australian was barred from leaving Korea and had to hang around, three or four weeks, while the case was unwound. She never shared the ultimate outcome, that I am aware of.

I am planning to do some riding in Korea later this year, so I have been considering some kind of travel insurance that provides liability while abroad. From what I read, a rider on a bicycle is legally viewed as being the same as a motor vehicle in that country, but my insurance here in the US only covers activity in North America (US and Canada).

here in thailand we have nearly daily horror stories, usually involving tourists renting
scooters/motorcycles with no motorcycle license and almost always without travel
health insurance. those that happened to have coverage almost always find their
claims disallowed.

bad one this week....british guy had been in se.asia for five months, traveling and renting
motorcycles. couple days ago was riding to immigration office to extend a tourist visa,
collided with a sugarcane truck, dragged for 15 meters.

was not pretty. google "degloving".....do NOT google images.

there is a gofundme set up to pay hospital expenses for the uninsured rider.
immigration extended his tourist visa for 3 months for treatment.
after that, he will return home.
half his leg will remain here.

gofundme: a tax on the friends and relatives of people who are good at math.

Travel health insurance is cheap for a youngster your age with no health conditions. Might cost you a hundred or $150 for a year! Does not make sense to go with out it. (Off topic sorta, but...) Same goes for renters insurance to cover your belongings in an apartment or other housing type accommodations. So very cheap, and covers your keister, just in case. It's a necessary evil. And yes when you get home unscathed, you'll say that it was a waste of money. But it has already been said, when you need it, it's too late if you don't got it!

I spoke with a representative of one major insurer who issues travel policies, and YMMV, but his conclusion was that because their policy language doesn't explicitly prohibit cycling, it is covered without additional ("hazardous sports") coverage being purchased. But getting to the bottom of it-- what does "yes, we cover cycling" really mean-- probably requires a careful reading of the policy.

In the case of the Australian tourist that I mentioned previously, she had liability exposure because the Korean national she collided with fractured her neck, and the family wanted money. So a travel policy which covered personal injuries would have been worthless, as the Australian was apparently uninjured.