Sketches of misfortune in an insurance trade card

https://forgottenfiles.substack.com/p/accidents-happen-c1890s

by samclemens • 3 years ago

56 28 3 years ago

forgottenfiles.substack.com

kogus• 3 years ago

The first card image is interesting to me because of how many animal-related injuries it features, hinting at the much more rural life that most people had at that time. Three horses, a cow and a dog - I think a modern equivalent would include at most the dog.

lief79• 3 years ago

Remember, horses were the common mode of transportation then.

idlewords2• 3 years ago

Even today, the deadliest animals in Australia (supposed land of deadly wildlife) are horses, cows, and dogs, in that order.

weaksauce• 3 years ago

how are cows causing that much death?

snakeyjake• 3 years ago

Horses caused many, many more pedestrian deaths in pre-automobile New York City than cars do today (or 30 years ago when pedestrian deaths were at their peak).

And that's just them going out of control and crushing someone, never mind the infectious disease spread by mountains of manure lining and rotting horse corpses (15,000 in 1880 alone!) littering the streets.

bitwize• 3 years ago

It's like the Gashlycrumb Tinies as a marketing tool for insurance. Somehow both cynically capitalistic, and comforting to know insurance companies were a bit cheeky long before GEICO television ads.

idlewords2• 3 years ago

What is cynical about this?

londons_explore• 3 years ago

Interesting that in general, such personal accident insurance isn't widespread today.

Instead, people hope to find someone to sue - for example, suing mcdonalds for hot coffee.

However, if I have my arm eaten off by a crocodile tomorrow and I can no longer do my job, I wouldn't be covered by anything. Can't sue a crocodile.

kylehotchkiss• 3 years ago

Whoever owned the land didn’t tell you with an easily viewable sign that there are crocodiles nearby. You have a liable party now! Why do you think California puts a label on everything saying it could cause cancer?

Plus disability insurance should cover this?

toast0• 3 years ago

Why do you think California puts a label on everything saying it could cause cancer?

Not to reduce liability related to the exposure. But because the voters passed a proposition that demands it. If you are harmed from the exposure in a way you can conclusively show, the prop 65 label won't absolve liability.

Ylpertnodi• 3 years ago

Instead, people hope to find someone to sue - for example, suing mcdonalds for hot coffee.

Considerably more to the story than that. Poor example with no valid example.

Wistar• 3 years ago

“As a result of her injuries, Ms. Liebeck spent eight days in a hospital. In that time she underwent expensive treatments for third-degree burns including debridement (removal of dead tissue) and skin grafting.”

Public Citizen: “Legal Myths: The McDonald’s ‘Hot Coffee’ Case.”

https://www.citizen.org/article/legal-myths-the-mcdonalds-ho...

mistrial9• 3 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform

DavidPeiffer• 3 years ago

However, if I have my arm eaten off by a crocodile tomorrow and I can no longer do my job, I wouldn't be covered by anything. Can't sue a crocodile.

Isn't this what disability insurance is for? Every company I've worked for has offered disability insurance at no cost.

Is it the best disability insurance available? Probably not. But it would cover a crocodile eating your arm.

OkayPhysicist• 3 years ago

A lot of life insurance plans also cover dismemberment, too.

Current job says my literal arm and a leg is ~$80,000. $120,000 if it's done by a trolley.

jrockway• 3 years ago

As many other comments mention, that's not really a fair summary of the McDonald's case. If this were to happen today, you'd go to the hospital who would bill your health insurance. Your health insurance would then ask how you got burned, and would probably sue McDonald's for the medical costs.

Again, as the other comments mention, it's common to have insurance against accidents that prevent you from doing your job. I don't recall having this at startups, but I might not have been paying attention. At big companies, there are short term and long term disability insurance. Depending on what field you're in, you could probably do an office job with one arm. Chording one-hand keyboard, probably up to 85% pre-accident productivity. Things that should keep you up at night are things like "what if I hit my head on a doorway and my brain is damaged to the point that I can't do my office job anymore". While unlikely, having insurance for that is great.

Finally, people can have personal liability insurance (and probably do through their renters or homeowners policies) to cover inadvertently causing financial losses to other people. Say someone comes into your house and your bookshelf falls over on them. It's kind of your fault, so you have insurance for that.

DoreenMichele2• 3 years ago

Insurance is interesting and has an interesting history. It started as a form of speculating or gambling and it's still a form of "betting."

Like casinos, an insurance company needs to design their product such that "house wins" in the aggregate. They need to take in enough income to pay employees, keep the lights on, pat out claims and turn a profit.

So they need good info on how to price it such that it is sustainable.

One way they make it sustainable: they conservatively invest part of the money they take in to defray costs.

h2odragon• 3 years ago

There's religions that get exemptions from "insurance required" laws because they view it as gambling. They often do a mutual assurance bonding thing instead.

Insurance companies use a whole different kind of statistics than many of the other sciences do; "actuarial science." "Statistics" is all about making your numbers appear to support your hypothesis, whereas actuarial is about finding the data hidden in those numbers.

DoreenMichele2• 3 years ago

I worked in insurance. I'm not crazy about insurance, actually.

If you can find another means to cover your needs, I recommend you go with that. If you can't, there are scenarios where insurance makes sense.

Example: If you want life insurance solely to cover your funeral, just do a prepaid funeral. If you have dependent minors, ideally you should have life insurance to help them should you die.

m463• 3 years ago

I believe the amish don't use insurance.

They also don't do social security (although I'm uncertain if they pay, or just don't use it)

Terr_• 3 years ago

I find myself oddly-appreciative of their explanation text:

Insurance simply distributes losses. The Company collects from all, that it may relieve some. You are as apt to be the one to be relieved as another. If vou do not meet with an accident you are simply taxed to relieve the necessities of some one who does, and may well be thankful that your suffering is confined to the pocket. You are much the gainer if you get nothing back; but, if you should be unfortunate, the insurance would be fully appreciated.

I have no data for it, but my impression is that a distressingly large chunk of people still don't understand insurance, which would make this kind of primer is equally--if not more--important now than it was back around 130 (!) years ago.

Sketches of misfortune in an insurance trade card

Related Stories