Which is fine for Ron Paul to say.

Let's think it through for a second.

Katrina, earthquake, fire, hurricane, floods, tsunami, etc. Wipes out your home and insurance policy. You have no where to live, nothing to sleep on, no clothing for you and your family, no toilets and completely reliant on charity. The disaster might also of effected your job and income. Especially if you're working from home on your keyboard.

So now Ron Paul thinks no one should step in and help, to save the rest of the US a few tax dollars. You're left phoning an Insurance company to find out the policy number, cover, exemptions, so you can sit on the kerb with your family waiting for the check to arrive. Praying they don't delay and delay or decide they're not liable because of some wierd clause and will settle in court.

I hope this never happens to you sperbonzo even though you think it's a great idea.

I can see your "I'm all right Jack and fuck you" attitude coming through.

Think of taxes as a form of insurance in times of disaster. Yes it's not a great system and probably not the most cost efficient. But it beats hands relying on some Insurance company who worry more about returning profits and dividends for investors than victims.

Maybe they should of waited for the Insurance Companies to pay out on the Gulf Oil Spill. Or wait for BP to shell out the cash, while everything got fucked up. And BP argued that the reason for 50% of the claims was the lack of immediate clean up.

Why stop there. Lets stop having Firemen, Police, Coast Guards dealing with accidents paid by the Government. Lets do that via Insurance Companies as well. </sarcasm on the last part>

In the absence of your smiling face ...

Actually I give to charities, I help friends who are in trouble, (sometimes having them stay with us for months when a disaster has hit their lives)... and I myself have been through some really really hard times where I had nothing and I was on the street. This has nothing to do with not wanting to help people. The more that government is in charge of people, the less that people will be wont to help on their own. The average person in the US gives 9 times more to charity than the average EU citizen, because in the EU the government is expected to cover everything.

I think that private groups helping people are far far better at it than government will ever be, much more efficient, and much faster in their response times... I think that that the whole world will be much healthier when people realize that the nature of government is to grow more and more, to centralize power more and more, and to control us more and more. Sometimes that control is buried in the name of "helping you". You should watch "Illegal Everything", by John Stossel.

Someone made a post about people being "allowed to build a house on a hill". I can see a day when the government will be able to make those decisions all the time. If the government is covering your risks, then that gives them the right to tell you where you can build.


.:2 cents:

I don't think he's an idiot. I think Ron Paul is a great philosopher. I'm just not convinced his extreme libertarian philosophies can work in practice overnight. It depends on a whole lot of people to be social, compassionate, and community-driven by nature but at the same time creating a larger group of people complaining about being forced to be social, compassionate, and community-driven. In order for it to work, it relies on them to want to do the same things they don't want to do.

Who the fuck is this JohnnyClips idiot? lol.

gfy's new philosopher and anti-authoritarian.

So we should all rely on charity. Assuming all out neighbors aren't in the same boat. :Oh crap

Yes in America you need more charity. Here we have National Insurance we pay as part of our taxes so we don't need to beg.

No matter where the help comes from, it needs to come immediately without some form being filled in for some risk assessor to check and then his superior to check and then sent to the accounts department for them to sit on it. assuming the risk assessors agreed to pay. What if your assessment of the damage doesn't tally with their assessment of what it should be according to their graphs?

As for private groups. You're clutching straws. Should a private group of cleaned the Gulf?

All so you can save yourself a few dollars in taxes. :mad:

There are times when disasters hit. Like my cancer and Eva's accident. We had paid insurance for all our working life and we were covered when the disasters hit. It's called National Insurance and covers you even when you fall on hard times and no longer pay. You've already paid for the times when the shit has really hit the fan and an Invalid and unable to work.

Am I relying on the Government or getting back some of what I paid in for?

Maybe the US should stop supporting Israel with handouts or has that stopped now? They could of asked their neighbors. </sarcasm>

Just another idiot. :2 cents:

you are free to move to the libertarian paradise the republic of congo.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

no i would get the AUTHORITIES to FORCE you to!

makes my blood boil that people entitle themselves to other peoples money simply because they were "too good" to insure themselves or "too smart" to build on stable ground....shit id never build under the sea level for fucks sake what kind of moron would???

its natural selection...you build where its not safe=you are an idiot you deserve to lose everything...

not when the aliens from the hollow earth control it. you should know that johnny c'mon.

yes it makes me boil when cowards rely on the state to enforce intellectual property rights instead of taking matters into their own hands. pathetic if you act me.

100 libertarian utopias.

but somehow taxes paid to your state isn't "stealing" and no force is used. please explain.

I think its funny when people yell for the free market. When they owe their living to the government funding of the Creation of the net.

but ron paul believes force is ok to be used to collect taxes at the state level. please explain.

lol jew troll got pwned again. The piece of trash needs to shutup and go away

I'd probably have a different take-away from his comment. To my mind he's saying that federal and state taxes are thefts of money from citizens.

no for ron paul it's ok for the states to "steal" taxes just not at the federal level.

Ron Paul have cash and can talk such bullish :P

Funny the amount of people that line up to suck the cock of insurance company CEO's.

He's a man who I feel sees but misreads other people because he wears idealistic glasses.

people who do not want to insure their property are not exactly in the same boat as people who make intellectual property and the state has not yet put in place adequate laws to protect their property....it is not even a close analogy....

as for IP holders protecting their own shit by use of force I agree with you 100% bro...shit I am a big muscular caveman kind of guy I'd love to fly the fuck over and make an example out of some emo hippy "file sharer" and film myself going caveman on his ass, would be some good entertainment LOL but unfortunately the law prohibits caveman behavior so I have to rely on the law to make things right....

I really agree with you 100% tho....justice ended the day they made it illegal for samurais to carry their swords, because in the old days some "file sharer" would steal my shit and I would cut him in half with a sword :thumbsup

So lets take this to it's logical conclusion. In cases of a disaster we should all rely on the Insurance companies or charities to come and help out.

9/11 costs approach $2 trillion
2005 Hurricane Katrina $84,000,000,000
2011 Joplin tornado $2,800,000,000
2011 Hurricane Irene $10,100,000,000
2011 Tornado $STILL COUNTING Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Louisiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania

More here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_death_toll

Look at the costs of cleaning those up and add them to your insurance policies. Then figure out if you're going to save a few bucks on your taxes and not pay a lot more on your insurance. Because we all know how Insurance companies like to shave costs, look at the terrible cost cutting in the hospitals they fund. :upsidedow

They will cut costs if your policy wasn't up to date, you can't find it, it didn't cover that type of disaster, you got laid off and missed payments. Or for any reason they can think of.

Truth is the costs of clearing up some of these disasters would either bankrupt companies or hike your premiums to costs that would make little or not savings. Cold even add them to your cover.

hes an asshole for sure

He's an asshole regardless.

why are you supporting this authority figure.

I called him an asshole, that is my opinion of him based on numerous things and an opinion makes perfect sense.

you don't support him politically? it sounds like you want him to penetrate you

Paul, insurance companies are insured. It's an entire industry called reinsurance.

More from the GFY think tank.

http://lolsnaps.com/upload_pic/VoteR...2012-99258.jpg

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz...3n54o1_500.jpg

http://funnytshirts.savatoons.com/im...onpaul2012.jpg

ADG

if you purchased enough insurance to cover the damage why do you need help from the government.

I find it hilarious when you come up on a new bit of info or someone way more intelligent than you discussing topics then you come here and use a word or phrase as your 'word of the week'.

L. Ron Paulbert

Vote for HE

Kind of like these guys
http://www.benzinga.com/files/aig_0.gif
Who wound up reinsuring them?

Except AIG is paying back their bailout money on track and on time. The US Treasury expects to recoup the full amount. :2 cents:

Exactly my point. When these insurance companies write contracts with one another all it is is window dressing; a big fucking scam to make them look better on paper, but they have no intention of ever paying out on the contract, which was well demonstrated after the mortgage crisis.

I think you're confused. In the context of natural disaster insurers anyways.

Dumbest quote of the thread.

It was in reply, I assume, to my thread about the costs of insurance companies dealing with these disasters being passed on in premiums.

Warchild, do you think the reinsurance industry will re-insure the extra risk cost without passing this cost back to the consumers?

WC I actually know a lot more about the reinsurance industry than you think. Do you? Without hitting Google.

During the 80s I sold office furniture to Reinsurance companies and dated one of the girls who was selling reinsurance. Interesting business.

Paul, I live in Bermuda one of the reinsurance capitals of the world. I have many friends that work directly in the business in the year 2012. Traders, auditors, partners and the like. I'm going to go ahead and say that trumps you selling office furniture to somebody who sold reinsurance 30 years ago. :1orglaugh

If I'm ever interested in what dirt poor third world women have to do to survive, I'll gladly bow to your knowledge.

What i'm saying is that in the event of a catastrophic disaster, say a 9.0 earthquake hit L.A., or a tsunami wiped out Seattle; the insurance companies would be assed out, which is where the federal government steps in. The reinsurers assuming the risk - even for natural disaster insurance - are banking on never having to actually pay out on the contract. The entire insurance industry is a fucking scam.

Exposed as a person who knows little. Bermuda isn't the reinsurance capital of the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinsurance#Markets

If you read that you might get a better picture of what you're babbling about. My customers were connected to Lloyds of London. "In addition, syndicates at Lloyd's of London wrote £6.3 billion of reinsurance premium in 2008."

Reinsurance works fine up to a certain level, like a $50,000,000. Disasters can cost $billions. Asking companies who are a few billions at the biggest to take risks of many billions is going to be costly. You simply move the cost to a company in Germany, London, Bermuda :Oh crap, Switzerland, France and the USA.

The USA couldn't rely on private enterprise to rescue the banks. The costs were too high. Private Enterprise had not "insured" itself against the risk of it all going tits up. So the choice was to face the risk of a depression to the level of the 30s, with anyone with money at risk to lose it and everything else. Or for the Government to step in.

And that's what Ron Paul is advocating, that insurance companies with reinsurance companies taking the burden of covering the costs. This will include providing immediate relief, rebuilding roads, schools, hospitals, fire and police stations and every other part of the infrastructure that has been hit. Because before you pay out to rebuild a house, you have to make sure of a lot more things being in place.

So not only will your cost of insurance climb, the savings in taxes won't be so great. As all public amenities will have to have this extra cover as well.

Ron Paul I assume has done all the calculations of what that would cost. It's silly to think he's preaching to the mob who think this is going to save them money.

Of course anyone who is retired, on a low wage, invalid, out of work or doesn't have the complete covers for everything. Can go whistle and live in a field. Because the insurance companies won't pay for them.

Actually the last part isn't true. It's a casino. They calculate the risks, costs, premiums and payouts. Like casinos they always tip the odds in favor of the house.

So if they have to pay out the 2005 Hurricane Katrina clean up and costs it's $84,000,000,000. So the total insurance cover for the area of New Orleans is going to need to include the possibility of that size of payout.

Obviously Katrina doesn't hit New Orleans every year. But they do hit every year and they do cost money to clean up. So just imagine insurance cover being enough to pay out that every year. And if it doesn't happen, it goes to the share holders and the re insurers who shared the risk.

It's not all coming back in cut price insurance. :error

I'm not sure what you are saying here. So Ron Paul's son has a different view from his father....


This proves what, exactly?



:helpme

Yes Paul somebody has been exposed as a person who knows little and once again it's you.

I didn't say it was THE reinsurance capital, I said and I quote here "One of the reinsurance capitals of the world"

From your own link

Further proof you once again have no idea what you're talking about. $50Million is nothing. That would be an amount covered by the primary insurer, not reinsurance.

Reinsurance policies are typically taken out to pay claims in EXCESS of a certain amount of money. $50M might be a starting point for that, but more likely it's going to be in the 100s of millions of dollars.

I mean, what do I know? I only know about this stuff from traders and partners actually in the industry. I don't have the benefit of having been a furniture salesman. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh