Let's say you pay insurance premiums (your money, which is tangible) all your life for a promise (a promise is intangible)

The promise from the insurer is always there but you never use it. Since a promise is intangible, what did you get for your money that was tangible?

Now, if you were fully aware from the beginning that you will never get anything tangible if you never use the promise, should you still raise that "intangible" versus "tangible" aspect of the insurance with the insurer?

The question would be: "What will I get for my premiums that's tangible if, as it turns out, I never use your promise"?

Or are you comfortable paying thousands of dollars over many years knowing you'll never get anything tangible for your money under these circumstances?

Risk tables are tangible so you can decide if something is worth the risk of insurance. Home and car insurance are a no brainer but I self insure for loss of income.

So you all feel comfortable with intangibility if you never have to make a claim

In a premium, there is a "payout" component, a calculated amount that when added to the "payout" component of other insurees, builds up and is used to help victims of accidents, house fires, car theft, unfortunate health, etc

Would you feel just as comfortable if you were offered that "payout" component back if you never made a claim? and the insurer kept the administration component of the premium

There is two winners with that, the insurer gets paid for the work they do looking after your money, and you get the money back that was never used as a payout, for you that is

The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 10:56am:



What I'm trying to find out is, how much intangibility is tolerated in the community?

In your case, you would tolerate 100% intangibility because you are hoping you never have to make a claim, and you are willing to pay many thousands of dollars throughout your life for that intangibility ("peace of mind" is in itself intangible)

Is that a fair assessment?


There's also the matter of premiums being used to earn interest. If insurers are going to act as investment "bankers", insurees should be entitled to a slice of that income, especially if and when interest rates are at high rates. Interest is tangible income for the insurer, but the insuree (customer or client) is still in intangibility if they don't receive some of that income in their bank accounts

Gordon wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 2:59pm:



It's only tangible if you get a payout Gordon

If you never make a claim, it is intangible and remains that way with no thank you for your money or gold watch

Here's a trick question: If a crazy driver knew they would receive a substantial refund of say one third of their premiums back at the end of their motoring life if they never made a claim - would they become safer drivers or carry on their crazy driving, if they also knew that the refund would forfeited if they kept up their dangerous driving?

I'm getting much the same story from everyone, thanks for posting

What I've noticing from your opinions is that "intangible" is ok, if in your minds, it can be perceived as "tangible"


So far, these intangibles are perceived as tangibles

"Peace of mind"
"Reduced fear"
"Sleeping well"
"Risk management"
"Locking in risk profile"

Very interesting, I'm learning - thanks for your input