David R. Henderson  

Best of the Blogs

Hachette and Amazon made a dea... A Lot Happened in 1962...

A few highlights from blog posts today that caught my eye.

Understatement of the Day Award
Tyler Cowen: "The first volume of 949 pp. [of a biography of Stalin] brings the reader up only until 1928. A lot still happened after that." [DRH note: Stalin died in 1953 and, of course, most of what he did, and a very large percent of his evil, happened after 1928.]

The next two are from the same post by former co-blogger Arnold Kling.

Insight on Long-Term Care
"[L]ong-term care insurance is something that I think does make sense, but you should buy it to get through age 75 and then self-insure thereafter)."
I had literally (and yes, I use the word "literally" literally) never thought of this. I turn 64 next week and I'm thinking about lots of retirement issues. I'll look into this further.

Numeracy of the Day Award
Arnold's first reason for shunning annuities:
"You are charged more than the actuarially fair premium. Part of that is overhead and profit, and maybe part of that is adverse selection-the insurance company has good reason to fear that you are in better health than someone else your age. In any event, the result is that an annuity reduces your consumption possibilities by as much as would be the case if you over-estimated your lifespan by several years and budgeted accordingly."
It's that last sentence that grabbed me.

Comments and Sharing

COMMENTS (2 to date)
Philo writes:

Kling remarks that it would "reduce[] your consumption possibilities . . . if you over-estimated your lifespan by several years and budgeted accordingly." True enough, but let us not think of (potential) retirees as having no interests beyond their own consumption. Most people have interests that may be categorized, broadly speaking, as "charity." If they also have ample resources for retirement, the main effect of their overestimating their own lifespans will be that they spend somewhat less on those other interests while alive, at death leaving larger estates to be devoted to those interests. The effect on their own *consumption* may be negligible.

Tiago writes:

To be fair to Tyler's post, I believe "a lot" in that context refers to Russia's (or the USSR) territorial expansion, not Stalin's misdeeds.

Comments for this entry have been closed
Return to top