Letters to the Editor
-
Sean SIberio, i can *imagine* "eliminating racial and sexual barriers
but *monetary* ones? in a heterogeneous society? i can imagine it in homogenous societies like scandinavia, germany and holland, where it's looked upon as some sort of collective insurance, but in the U.S. where extreme heterogeneity exists, one group is always pitted against another. race, sex and money all intersect in life insurance. you could have true insurance, where rates are determined by *all*, but that's not what happens. whites live longer than blacks and females live longer than males. but it is only "segregated" i.e. categorized, by sex not race. why? perhaps there's some deep sociological reason why one differentiation is accepted but another isn't. to me, there should be *one* national insurance, and it would cover *everything* health, life, fire, and flood. the government would just print the money - it would be taken out evenly via inflation. perhaps there are holes in this that i haven't realized, but it would be comforting to know that my government would try and help me out in emergency. whatever.