Insurance News & Info
Auto, Home, Health and Life Insurance
Google News- Your Insurance policies may go demat soon - Hindustan Times
- Summit tackles 'whiplash epidemic' - The Press Association
- Chances for coastal insurance overhauls uncertain on eve of legislative session - al.com (blog)
- Rinehart threatens to cancel ransom insurance for her children - Sydney Morning Herald
- Well-off get more from health insurance rebate - Sydney Morning Herald
- Brown County considers insurance surcharge for smokers - Green Bay Press Gazette
- Q&A: Make life insurance a premium consideration - The Olympian
- Local Catholics oppose Fed health insurance rule - Marietta Daily Journal
- Insurance company sues Michael A. Eddings in real estate fallout - Columbus Ledger-Enquirer
- Two Insurance Agents Accused Of Embezzling - The Ledger
- Insurance Journal
- Out of Trust C.M. Meiers Brokerage in Southern California Fetches $1.375 Million at Auction
- Virginia Court Grants Rehearing of Global Warming Claims Case
- Judge Certifies Investor Class Action Against Goldman Sachs
- Aon Expands U.S. Tenant Rent Default Offerings
- Earnings Reports: Validus Holdings
- XL Enhances Real Estate Portfolio Protection
- Ohio Announces $11.6M in Insurance Savings, Recoveries in 2011
- TDECU Insurance Acquires 2 More Texas Independent Agencies
- Utah Offers New Earthquake Hazard Maps for Salt Lake County
- Federal Disaster Loans For More Reno Fire Victims
- Insurer: Penn State Policy Limits Lawsuit Coverage
- Family of Slain Border From Arizona Agent Files $25M Claim
- Headlines
- Top Mobile Auto Insurers RankedOn the heels of 2011 consumer research that cited mobile as a new, impactful hub of consumers for insurers, a new study from Key Lime Interactive (KLI) revealed State Farm to have the best website among mobile insurers. USAA was cited as having the best mobile application. The mobile ... […]
- Allstate adds roof insurance to improve homeowners revenueInsuranceHeadlines Breaking News/Chicago - Allstate Corp., trying to improve profits in its homeowners' insurance business, will launch a new product called House & Home that will deal with losses caused by poorly maintained roofing, its chief executive said Thursday. The Northbrook-based insurer, whose stock whose stock closed ... […]
- Captive insurers strengthen business resilienceMIAMI—Resilience is more important than anticipation for businesses, Willis Group Holdings P.L.C. Chairman and CEO Joseph J. Plumeri told the 2012 World Captive Forum on Tuesday, but without a captive insurer a company's resilience is limited. Giving the keynote presentation at the World Captive Forum at the Doral Golf ... […]
- Ruling on Contraception Draws Battle Lines at Catholic CollegesBridgette Dunlap, a Fordham University law student, knew that the school’s health plan had to pay for birth control pills, in keeping with New York state law. What she did not find out until she was in an examining room, “in the paper dress,” was that the student health service ... […]
- CFA: Auto insurers overcharging the poorNEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The car owners who are least able to afford high auto insurance rates are getting charged the most for coverage, according to a consumer watchdog group. In a report released earlier this week, the Consumer Federation of America claimed that auto insurers are using pricing ... […]
- Top Mobile Auto Insurers Ranked
- Insurance News
- Auto Insurance
haha, okay. at least we agree on the “I have nothing more to say to you” part. good luck with the statism thing.
I thought when I started these comments, given that you went through question by question that you might be a logical, rational person it is clear however after engaging you, that you aren’t. You have no idea about the things you’re talking about. You’re stuck in a fantasy world full of ideals which you haven’t seen tested because you clearly haven’t opened a book or experienced life outside your secure little world. You’re blind to reality and that’s ok, but I have nothing more to say to you
Actually I have plenty of examples. The United States of America is absolutely littered with examples, as is much of the third world. There is a reason no other country on the planet goes to such extremes of capitalism as the United States of America does. But there is no point in me listing examples when you’re clearly to foolish to understand them or the free market.
and when you get a chance, watch?v=CnAUc62G-UE
hahaha. you have no examples, only rhetoric. you are a weak, dependent statist, and I’ve seen your kind a thousand times. get out of my comments.
All I can say is I, like most of humanity is extremely glad your ignorant mind isn’t in charge of any country. If you honestly can’t see all the hardship and suffering private enterprise and purist capitalism has caused then you are surely a blind, ignorant flood, whom I have nothing more to say to. I’m all for rational debates, but you honestly have no clue nor morality.
yes, I honestly believe that. why is my water supply any different than my gas company or my electric company or the water I buy in a store? half the things you mentioned are already private enterprise and work better than if they were public. pure capitalism “causes nothing but hardship and suffering”? how do you figure?
So you honestly believe that private enterprise should be in charge of your water supply? I’m sorry but in the history of humanity pure capitalism like you’re taking to has caused nothing but hardship and suffering. There are things which should always remain public property and always be administered by a democratically elected government. Water, roads, public transport, waste management, emergency services and HOSPITALS are the main things which should be dealt with as such.
I disagree with the premise. I’m a libertarian minarchist, if you’re not familiar with the ideology that means I don’t think the State should have a hand in any of the things you mentioned, either, except *maybe* law enforcement. but private enterprise would handle all these things much more efficiently.
Here is a better way of looking at it. Who do you pay money to, to keep your roads in working condition? Who do you pay money to, to keep water in your tap? Or to collect your garbage? Who do you pay money to, to enforce your laws or put out fires?
A: The government, through taxes. Why should it be different for healthcare?
Wow, you truly have your blinded on to the state of the US. I don’t live in the US, I live in Australia, a country that DOES have a socialised health care system with a commercialised option.
This church and charity you’re talking about simply don’t exist in health care and beyond that there is a large demand. This is why your president is proposing these changes. I think you need to take off your rose tinted glasses there champ and go look around your country. Try sitting in an ER
Social health care is not forcing doctors to do anything. It’s about a community paying a small amount of money each in order for everyone to have free open access to health care.
What is proposed in the US is NOT even going that far. No doctor, nor hospital will be out of pocket or forced to do something they don’t want to. It’s merely about sharing the cost of health care across the community.
Again, clearly you don’t get how international law works. The united states has signed and ratified the treaty on the UNHDR. Ratified means it was made local law inside your own country. The way the UN is structured as well, your local (country) constitution CAN be over ruled.
Oh now I get it, you don’t actually understand the law. When you sign with a health insurance provider you actually make an agreement that they’re allowed to behave in that manner. That is how insurance companies stay in business and a court CAN NOT help you as you’ve agreed to it.
in summation, your implication that, because I don’t support socialized healthcare, that I’m some kind of animal, is pathetic. if you wish for the State to use force against you to take your money and give it to others, move to a country that does so (moreso than ours now). I on the other hand choose a system where I am not a slave to you or any other man.
your last point is more of the poorly thought out liberal emotionalism we’ve all come to love, but allow me to address it for the 100th time anyways. if you weren’t already aware, we already have a “partially socialised healthcare system”. in fact more than partially – very much so. money never has and never will be more important to me than human suffering or human life. my LIBERTY, though, is. there are proper channels through which ANYONE can get Church or charity ALREADY.
#3: they don’t take an oath to do it for free, or for charity. and in that scenario, they do it out of free will, not out of force.
#2: NOTHING overrules our Constitution. anything we “agree” to, which the Constitution conflicts with, the Constitution wins.
#1: that is exactly my point about the courts. if the contract is not being enforced it is the COURTS that must be held liable, just like in any other industry or walk of life.
Now here is a question for you at what point to YOU PERSONALLY did money become MORE IMPORTANT than human suffering &/or human life? Because by NOT supporting at least a partially socialised healthcare system where everyone is entitled to healthcare because you argue it’s property and about money you’re literally saying, that money is more important than human life. Go look into a dying childs eyes and tell them they can’t get better because their parents don’t have the right health insurance!
In addition, there is nothing in your constitution that talks about socialised healthcare one way or another. Healthcare is NOT property! If you have 2 people left alive, one being a doctor, YES they have a very strong moral obligation to help the other person should they become ill. In fact doctors take an oathe stating just that!
In response to your second point of order, I’d like to draw your attention to the fact that United States is amoung other nations whom have signed and ratified the UNHDR which DOES include the right for every member of a community to have healthcare. In orderwords it’s actually already part of your international legal obligations and over rules your constitution.
In response to your first point of order, if someone is to cancel a health insurance contract then what are they meant to do for healthcare? My understanding is that health insurance premiums in the US are extremely high and they’re able to refuse to pay for things which you’re actually meant to be covered for. In order words you pay a company money and they can chose to not fulfill their obligation when it comes time. How is that sensible?