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

I'd think we could all agree that this background is on more firm ground than selling them some tables 3 decades ago yes. ;)

I think Paul would agree with this as well if he put the wine down for a few hours..

If and only if the state is unable to help itself, then the government *maybe* would step up and help them. But then that asks the question, why can't the state help? If it is simply because of the size of disaster, yes, they should get federal help. If it is because they can't balance their budget, then I'm sorry about their luck. Maybe next time the people will vote better people into office.

Good to see you supporting business going out of the US then. The Bahamas are players in this market.

$50 million is an estimate of the level of the re-insurer not the total market or the size of some of the companies. As you can see by the amounts paid out the size of the companies at present would in no way cover the cost of the clean ups. Go back to both of the links I have given and see the costs of cleaning up after these disasters. The premiums would rise to cover the costs.

Essentially this is just the "I will give you money." debate. Without looking into the facts. What proof has Ron Paul got that taking disaster relief funding out of the hands of the US Government and giving it over to the private Insurance and reinsurance industries worldwide would save money?

Obviously all the public building and amenities will need to be insured as well. The insurance needs to cover the cost of immediate emergency relief, getting shelter, food, clothing, medical, communications, power to the effected areas. Can't sit around and wait for a risk assessor to go over his figures to allocate the money. In the event of an disaster damaging roads, railway lines, who will pay for the food to be airlifted and the repairs to be got under way ASAP?

Will taking out the Government paying and providing ultimate relief in cases of a disaster, prove cheaper than providing an extra income for all the "Traders, auditors, partners and the like." In the Bahamas, EU, Switzerland and the US?

He's just playing to the masses who think if you take it out of Government hands, it will save money. Until the Government has to step in and rescue the Private Companies. :Oh crap

Glen go away and work out how to make your free tubes a success. That needs your attention a lot more than this.

Again. Where is the documented proof that passing over the insurance against disasters to private companies will save money. No anecdotal comments. I want to know how Ron Paul assumes that taking this out of taxes and into the premiums of private companies will save money and provide a better system?

Otherwise he's just blowing smoke up the asses of hicks who think as deeply as a few here.

Why would I care at all about business leaving the USA? I'm not American. I'm not from the United States. It makes no difference at all to me.

There's a very good reason why you would run this type of business from a place like Bermuda. Reinsurance companies don't just collect premiums and sit on the money. They trade and invest those premiums for profit. Basing this type of company out of a location that doesn't have personal or corporate income tax just makes sense.

and paul markham derailed yet another thread.

The Red Cross is running comercials on the radio, telling everyone how to donate money to help. It was some freaky weather here that day.... I never seen them shut down schools early over tornado warnings. they said it would happen at 5pm. wow they were close!!!! about 4:50 is when shit started going down.

And putting Disaster Relief costs into the hands of people outside the US, who gamble the money on the markets makes sense to you. :upsidedow

Seems I win and you lose. Unless you're going to tell us the markets are a sure fire winner for making money. :1orglaugh

No morons did that. Thinking putting all this into the hands of companies outside the US, who are clearly not equipped to deal with the costs and even some who think giving it to gamblers on the markets derailed this thread.

Paul, you haven't won anything. If you really want to make a win/lose comparison between you and me let's look at the industry we're both in. You barely make it by month to month on a shitty little goverment pension after 30 years in the industry. I make more than your pension in the first few days of the month and spend less time working each month than you do posting on GFY. :2 cents:

We can argue all day about what should have been done in advance of the disaster, who should pay for the cleanup, whether or not the locals should receive any assistance other than that they are due under their insurance policies, etc. etc. -- but that debate won't bring us any closer to crafting a solution that will make a difference, either now or in the future.

Me, I'm all about solutions -- so when I look at the tornado destruction, what I see is an opportunity for a compromise that could address two high profile funding-related controversies at the same time:

Let's send the tornado victims thousands of crates filled with contraceptives.

Think of all the benefits this move would provide, all at once!

* Once all the contraceptives have been removed and distributed, uninsured local citizens can establish residence in the empty crates left behind.

* Any "sluts" living in the area won't have to worry about where to find aspirin to squeeze between their knees.

* Over time, the mass influx of contraceptives might even lead to there being fewer prospective tornado victims living in the area to begin with.

See? It's not so hard to fashion a real solution to the country's problems; you simply have to be willing to think outside the box (and/or be willing to live inside of one).

Can't compare if you don't put up your side as proof of what you earn. No vague replies, or I told you before. Post proof you earn more than my pensions.

Of course a real comparison would be your whole time in the industry against mine. A "I earn more than a retired man." Is lame. Good level for you. :thumbsup

Still lets put it all in the hands of these guys. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17269048 :1orglaugh

Until the Government has to step in a hit them with fines to make them pay back their scams.

PJ, are you going to blame WC for derailing the thread with his replies? (WC = toilet :1orglaugh )

another thread derailed.

you think the world is run by aliens who live in the middle of the earth. you are the last person to tell anyone to get their head checked. :2 cents:

Until the Government has to step in to rescue their asses. :1orglaugh

The question is if the taxpayers should be on the hook for everything.

There is no question that private individuals and charities should help in such cases.

must be nice to live in such a simple and stupid reality.

private industry got us to the moon.

Normally Paul I couldn't be bothered to prove it to you and would just point out that what's good for the goose is good for the gander and you've offered no proof you have any pensions at all.

I'm going to make an exception this time around and post the stats for a site I started selling at the begining of February. One site Paul, out of the 25 or so I actively promote.

http://www.warchildsworld.com/lolpaul.jpg

These stats are for one video posted on a tube. Event hough we all know tubes can't sell memberships.

Your turn or would you rather just concede the checkmate?

Paul might be senile and confused but you're a flat out whack job. Just stay out of it.

Is this true? There are hollow earth aliens? They run the world?