Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Life
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

2017 ACTUARIAL SALARY SURVEYS
Contact DW Simpson for a Personalized Salary Survey

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-01-2009, 06:36 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 84,107
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Heh, I like your definition of "old" in your subject line, Take 2.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 12-01-2009, 07:20 AM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,428
Default

[tan]In an article about* the questionable value of cancer screening, a comment about "middle age" parenthetically explained that this was over 40 for women and over 50 for men. There was no explanation of how they came up with these numbers, and I was bemused by the whole idea that the one with longer life expectancy hit "middle age" sooner.[/tan]

* I think that was the topic.
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Apr 5, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-01-2009, 07:29 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 84,107
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMO View Post
[tan]In an article about* the questionable value of cancer screening, a comment about "middle age" parenthetically explained that this was over 40 for women and over 50 for men. There was no explanation of how they came up with these numbers, and I was bemused by the whole idea that the one with longer life expectancy hit "middle age" sooner.[/tan]

* I think that was the topic.
I'm guessing "middle age" there means "over the sell-by date".

Yes, women are considered less physically attractive [by men] at an age much younger than when men hit the same default judgment.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-01-2009, 10:54 AM
Chuck Chuck is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Incredible Hulctuary View Post
But most of them are still under 60.

Whereas the vast majority, I figure over 90%, of annuitized annuities are held by somebody over 60.

When somebody in the under-60 crowd dies, the life insurer takes a big loss from that premature death. But they can't save much money from the annuity owners who die before 60, because almost none of them have annuitized yet. Those early deaths of annuity owners may even cost the insurer a lot of money, if the annuity has a death benefit that can be larger than the cash value.
I am not saying that they are the same exact age group, but that the age groups on average are much closer than is implied by some of these commentaries on hedging mortality risks. Given that the age groups are closer, I think the chances of changes in mortality being correlated between the two groups is significantly more than implied. For example, the relative distribution of causes of death are likely more aligned between a 45 or 55 year old and a 75 year old than they are for a 25 year old and 75 year old and therefore intuitively (I am too lazy to research it) would be more correlated.

And I think the idea of war risk being an important differential is only of historic interest but not likely a meaningful factor in the future (because the 20 somethings are not a major factor in mortality exposure in either case, because current wars compared to historical wars I would guess have a much smaller impact on mortality (at least on our side for military engagements), and because terrorism likely spreads the mortality risk more uniformly among age groups).

Finally with longevity insurance, you could be "deferred annuitizing" the under 60's crowd and so would be more heavily correlated.

Chuck
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-02-2009, 09:27 AM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMO Fan View Post
I'd rather have a longevity watch than longevity insurance. Just saying.

[Longevity watch = timepiece that rings a little bell whenever I encounter a risk that is likely to shorten my life, e.g., oncoming train, tempting dessert, or late-night TV.]
See this essay. A prize winner in "Visions for the Future of the Life Insurance," the essay is about using biological age in pricing life insurance. The first page of the essay lays out the concept of biological age and remarks on progress to date in ways of estimating/measuring it.

I could easily picture implementing this in an i-phone or similar device. As soon as we get "two-way wrist radio" compactness, we really could have a device that continuously monitors your life expectancy.

[Actually, this idea was a key elemnet a prize winning story in one of the earliest Speculative Fiction contests. Unfortunately, I think the first 3 or 4 contest publications are only available in hard-copy.]
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Apr 5, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-02-2009, 10:05 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 84,107
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Well the Speculative Fiction contest goes back to 2001 online.

I thought "Worth the Risk" here: http://soa.org/files/pdf/fiction_version5.pdf had a similar idea.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 12-02-2009, 10:11 AM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,428
Default

The first Actuarial Speculative Fiction collection was dated 1996, Jim Toole, editor.
All-round prize winner, "The Actuary and Alfred Anderson," by David Kroll.

(I wonder if he still has a copy and would be willing to share it here.)
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Apr 5, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:16 AM
JMO's Avatar
JMO JMO is offline
Carol Marler
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Back home again in Indiana
Studying for Nothing actuarial.
Posts: 37,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMO View Post
[tan]In an article about* the questionable value of cancer screening, a comment about "middle age" parenthetically explained that this was over 40 for women and over 50 for men. There was no explanation of how they came up with these numbers, and I was bemused by the whole idea that the one with longer life expectancy hit "middle age" sooner.[/tan]

* I think that was the topic.
OK, I found the reference. It wasn't in the cancer screening article, but elsewhere in the same magazine in a little sidebar on many benefits of exercise. "A 2008 study of people in 80 countries found tha after the onset of middle age (40 for US women and 50 for men), people enter the highest risk-group for depression."

There is nothing at all to explain why "US" women, nor any explanation of the anomoly I mention about women getting to middle age earlier although their life expectancy is larger, implying (to me, at least) that the "middle" ought to be higher, too.

I'll cite the magazine - Time, Dec. 7, 2009, page 57.
__________________
Carol Marler, "Just My Opinion"

Pluto is no longer a planet and I am no longer an actuary. Please take my opinions as non-actuarial.


My latest favorite quotes, updated Apr 5, 2018.

Spoiler:
I should keep these four permanently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rekrap View Post
JMO is right
Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
I agree with JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westley View Post
And def agree w/ JMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG View Post
This. And everything else JMO wrote.
And this all purpose permanent quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan View Post
Yup, it is always someone else's fault.
MORE:
All purpose response for careers forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorNo View Post
Depends upon the employer and the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sredni Vashtar View Post
I feel like ERM is 90% buzzwords, and that the underlying agenda is to make sure at least one of your Corporate Officers is not dumb.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-02-2009, 12:15 PM
Loner's Avatar
Loner Loner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Third Half
Posts: 45,260
Default

Maybe they're defining middle age as the end of reproductive years? (or some percentile thereof? There are more 50 year olds fathering babies than birthing them, that's for sure)
__________________
2012 AO Rap Battle Champion
Co-Legend of the Water Cooler(TM)
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-02-2009, 02:54 PM
Take 2's Avatar
Take 2 Take 2 is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: second estate
Favorite beer: Hires Root
Posts: 5,055
Question no new buns in the oven => middle age

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loner View Post
Maybe they're defining middle age as the end of reproductive years? (or some percentile thereof? There are more 50 year olds fathering babies than birthing them, that's for sure)
That rough definition wouldn't surprise me. It's definitely a new season of life when you're "just" rearing children, not having new ones. This leads to a notion (reaffirmed by their adult children) that empty-nesters are "senior citizens."
__________________
there is no situation so bad that
getting upset won't make it worse

Last edited by Take 2; 12-14-2009 at 12:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aging, longevity, mortality, research

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.27752 seconds with 9 queries