2016Journal of Public Economic TheoryOpen access

Private, Social, and Self‐Insurance for Long‐Term Care in the Presence of Family Help

PH. DE DONDER, Pierre Pestieau

Open full text 25 citations

Abstract

Abstract We study the political determination of the level of social long‐term care insurance when voters can top up with private insurance, saving and family help. Agents differ in income, probability of becoming dependent and of receiving family help, and amount of family help received. Social insurance redistributes across income and risk levels, while private insurance is actuarially fair. The income‐to‐dependency probability ratio of agents determines whether they prefer social or private insurance. Family support crowds out the demand for both social and, especially, private insurance, as strong prospects of family help drive the demand for private insurance to zero. The availability of private insurance decreases the demand for social insurance but need not decrease its majority‐chosen level. A majority of voters would oppose banning private insurance.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract We study the political determination of the level of social long‐term care insurance when voters can top up with private insurance, saving and family help. Agents differ in income, probability of becoming dependent and of receiving family help, and amount of family help received. Social insurance redistributes across income and risk levels, while private insurance is actuarially fair. The income‐to‐dependency probability ratio of agents determines whether they prefer social or private insurance. Family support crowds out the demand for both social and, especially, private insurance, as strong prospects of family help drive the demand for private insurance to zero. The availability of private insurance decreases the demand for social insurance but need not decrease its majority‐chosen level. A majority of voters would oppose banning private insurance.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 25 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract We study the political determination of the level of social long‐term care insurance when voters can top up with private insurance, saving and family help. Agents differ in income, probability of becoming dependent and of receiving family help, and amount of family help received. Social insurance redistributes across income and risk levels, while private insurance is actuarially fair. The income‐to‐dependency probability ratio of agents determines whether they prefer social or private insurance. Family support crowds out the demand for both social and, especially, private insurance, as strong prospects of family help drive the demand for private insurance to zero. The availability of private insurance decreases the demand for social insurance but need not decrease its majority‐chosen level. A majority of voters would oppose banning private insurance.

Key concepts: Group insurance, Crowds, Key person insurance, General insurance, Social insurance, Private insurance, Self-insurance, Casualty insurance

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Private, Social, and Self‐Insurance for Long‐Term Care in the Presence of Family Help — Research Paper | ScholarLens