Jamie, thanks for responding.

I am not surprised by any of these familiar arguments. They include so many biases that I could write another article about them, but we will never agree. For example, #1 assumes a zero-sum risk dependency, so risk is reapportioned.

There may be some transfer of risk, but not much. I suppose I should have not used the term “share” in one of the sentences. I may edit the story to clarify that.

Thanks