Spring 2018 Q10 c.
Hi Graham,
Just wanted to point out in the BattleCards of this text you mentioned there are 5 criteria for evaluating the performance of a government insurance program (W/I-SEAN).
Although, I think only 3 criteria would be accepted at the exam.
Looking at the examiner's report of question 10 c. of the Spring 2018 exam, I found that:
1. Necessary and achieve social purpose are considered the same criteria
2. Efficient and accepted by the public are also considered the same criteria
I verified in the text source and the criteria are shown as below:
• Is the provision of the insurance by the government necessary or does it achieve a
social purpose that cannot be provided by private insurance?
• Is it insurance or a social welfare program?
• Is the program efficient, is it accepted by the public?
Thanks!
Comments
This is an interesting question. And the CAS interpreted the bullet points very literally here. The text is quite vague and broad with their interpretation. You have to carefully read through ALL the examples to get a sense of how the writers wanted these points t be interpreted.
I personally disagree with the answer provided by CAS and provide my reasoning below. Even if not correct, the lack of clarity should go the exam takers. This is a great example of why this exam is hard to do well on.
Necessary AND Social Purpose?
is this, exclusive OR (XOR) or OR or AND
It's hard to tell, but I interpret this as a general "OR" statement. Meaning one could be true or both (or sometimes neither).
Evaluation #1a: Is the provisions by the government necessary?
Evaluation #1b: Does it achieve a social purpose?
Is government participation in insurance necessary?
• Filling insurance needs unmet by private insurance
• Compulsory purchase of insurance
• Convenience
• Greater efficiency
• Social purposes
Worth pointing out "convenience" is not a social purpose nor is "greater efficiency" in fact only the last option: social purposes is given as a reason it is necessary... This would suggest necessary implies one of the above 5. And social purpose implies necessary. But I would still argue it's not that simple. Social purpose could still not be necessary. Regardless, the language is not clear.
Furthermore the use of "or" as a synonym should include commas as in:
"the espionage novel, or, as it is known in the trade, the thriller"
Social Welfare (different than social purpose)
Evaluation #2a: Is it insurance or a social welfare program? (AKA not insurance)
Efficient & Accepted
again a XOR, OR, AND problem. Can you be efficient and not accepted or accepted and not efficient (I would argue yes).
Evaluation #3a: Is the program efficient
Evaluation #3b: Is the program accepted
I'm not sure exactly what efficient means as it is mentioned a couple times in different contexts, but I'll assume: reasonable overhead costs & actuarially sound and affordable premiums (insurable and priced correctly). Accepted would appear to be equivalent to sold (or purchased). The argument here appears to be that a efficient program should be sold (but it isn't stated or clear how they made that leap). In my opinion, efficient is not the same as accepted. and a comma is not the same as a colon:
and to for the nail in the coffin, the use of a comma between the two statements can only make sense in English as a list (a colon would've been appropriate if it were a explanation)
1. Use a comma before any coordinating conjunction (and, but, for, or, nor, so, yet) that links two independent clauses.
2. Use a comma after a dependent clause that starts a sentence.
3. Use commas to offset appositives from the rest of the sentence.
4. Use commas to separate items in a series.
5. Use a comma after introductory adverbs.
6. Use a comma when attributing quotes.
7. Use a comma to separate each element in an address. Also use a comma after a city-state combination within a sentence.
8. Also use a comma to separate the elements in a full date
9. Use a comma when the first word of the sentence is freestanding "yes" or "no."
Oh chrisboersma, I recognize a fellow OCD-er when I see one. Thanks for the absolutely and totally complete answer to potatorambo's question!
Obviously I will just link to your answer from the wiki.
(The link to this thread is currently only in the wiki at the link below:
but it will be inserted into the BattleTable for OSFI.MCT after the exam next Wednesday Oct 24, 2018.)
My 2 cents: I do think the examiners are sometimes too strict and/or just plain wrong. It's almost like they're looking for ways to deduct points. The CAS claims very strongly not to grade on a curve but that just does not ring true. And I do not know of any successful appeal on 6C. A successful appeal would mean everyone's exam would have to regraded and I'm sure they don't want to do that. I'd love to see the stats on this exam. Maybe when you guys become Fellows, you'll be able to take a look.
BTW, I think t would've been more clear if the three criteria to assess a government insurance program were listed as
1. Necessary - or does it achieve a social purpose
You'll notice option 1 necessary may include any of the 4-necessary reasons for insurance: compulsory, convenience, efficiency, unmet needs [All 5 of these are "social purposes" - hence why I labeled social purposes as other social purposes.
So this point relates back to reasons for government insurance in the first place. Also worth mentioning here that the 5th option now appears quite generic: "Social Purposes" as the question already listed 4-social purposes for insurance
2. Insurance?
Here's pretty basic - if the government made a social program there's no point evaluating it as a insurance program
eg. hello Quebec Auto Insurance!
3. Success?
Is it used by the public, is it on budget, can it continue, is it self-sustaining?
You'll note that both 2012 and 2018 are consistent with this reasoning in their accepted answers. (they may have been more or less generous with answers that do not match this).
You can see it in the following example:
It's always good to rephrase in your own words. I see you used "success" in place of "accepted by the public". I suppose if it's successful then it would probably be accepted by the public - that might be part of the definition of success.
As you also said, the reasons for government insurance are not completely distinct from the criteria you'd use to evaluate a government program. They are all interrelated and there are many valid ways to express them. The authour's choice isn't necessarily the best.
I like that you thought about how this question would be answered if they had asked about flood insurance instead of WC. That's not an altogether unlikely question. That could be part of an answer to the flood insurance question from 2017.Spring Q10.