Who Pays - Safer Sports Subsidising Dangerous Sports

[HarryK]

Insurance on a no-fault basis is all very fine and good, but why do the safer sports have to continue to subsidise those which have a proven higher incidence of injury, death and payouts?

Looking at a range of 'risky' sports and looking to the Medibank and NZ ACC surveys along with the excellent work at UNSW, it is becoming obvious that a new way is needed.

Since the collapse of HIH, non-professional recreational sportsters, have been left to hang somewhat out to dry. The NSW government scheme is ok but limited with an injury needing to be >35% to rate on their radar.

Point is that if one participates in a safer sport, why do the premiums increase?

What experience / observations do the forum mebers have. Please let us all know.

Should everyone be required to self-insure with private insurers?

Would better purchasing (ie, lower premiums) be acomplished via peak bodies?

As the government scheme is only a temporary measure, what is the future?

What do the government insurance workers have to say?

:cool:

[injuryupdate]

In the NSW government scheme, premiums vary substantial by sport (e.g. some sports $1 per year annual premium, rugby league $20 per year annual premium, although this is for catastrophic injury only). Private sports insurance is available and premium also varies by sport (as it is allowed to).

It is private hospital insurance where premiums by law are not allowed to vary, although the government gives young people 30% rebate (compared to 35-40% rebate for the older people that the young ones subsidise). This is good news for someone with, say, diabetes, because they would be risk-rated out of being able to afford insurance. Most people think this is fair. However, it also means that non-smokers subsidise smokers, and people who swim and walk subsidise rugby league players and those who don't exercise at all. I agree that VOLUNTARY risk factors could be risk-rated and INVOLUNTARY risk factors could be subsidised, which would encourage healthy behaviour by people to try to keep their risk down. This sounds great, but the reason why the governments would shy away is that it is a hard line to draw. Do you say that fat people chose to be fat, and gay men with HIV chose to have male-male sex and put themselves at risk for the virus? It is very tough to make these calls.

[Hydrolyze]

Just wanted to say hello all. This is my first post.

I would like to learn alot here.