View original post
Yes, insurance transfers risk from one policyholder to a group of them including the initial one, with a third party charging a fee for shuffling their money back and forth between them. As long as ya'lls math checks profit is guaranteed. Even then there has been an alarming recent tendency to default force majeure and dismiss all claims (the most infamous case being Katrina victims with flood insurance informed "storm surge is not flooding," certainly news to anyone living near a levee.)
Yes, insurance transfers risk from one policyholder to a group of them including the initial one, with a third party charging a fee for shuffling their money back and forth between them. As long as ya'lls math checks profit is guaranteed. Even then there has been an alarming recent tendency to default force majeure and dismiss all claims (the most infamous case being Katrina victims with flood insurance informed "storm surge is not flooding," certainly news to anyone living near a levee.)
Insurance does not transfer risk from a singular individual to a group of policyholders. It transfers the risk form an individual to the COMPANY. The cost of that risk is evaluated among groups or classifications of LARGE numbers of people using statisticcs and what is comonly referred to as the Law of Large Numbers. What you do not KNOW about issurance far outweighs what you THINK you know. You are wandering in the relm of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" The vast majority of the conclusions you keep arriving at are wrong because you base assumptions are flawed. Please stop.
BTW: Flood insurance is a federal program (because no private company would be suicidal enough to offer it), and no homeowner's policy covers external flood. The problem arises with establishing which damage was caused by what source (storm or flood).
View original post
Yeah, I know how the game is played—hence why it is hypocritical to imply immorality in paying a groups claims with another much larger ones money, knowing the latter must always GREATLY exceed the former. That implication is not in itself hypocritical, but from someone WHO DOES IT FOR A LIVING....
Yeah, I know how the game is played—hence why it is hypocritical to imply immorality in paying a groups claims with another much larger ones money, knowing the latter must always GREATLY exceed the former. That implication is not in itself hypocritical, but from someone WHO DOES IT FOR A LIVING....
Insurance is NOT investment. This is a real simple concept. One is Apples, the other is a block of plastic. You can not interchange concepts between them, it does not work.
View original post
Frankly, there is no civil respectful way for me to state my opinion of private insurers, so I will not try; probably best to stay on the topic of public insurance.
Frankly, there is no civil respectful way for me to state my opinion of private insurers, so I will not try; probably best to stay on the topic of public insurance.
I am not sure how you can have a valid opinion since you have regularly demonstrated you have no idea what they actually are, and until you brought up the Federal Flood Insurance Program we have NEVER been discussing any form of public insurance. This discussion was about Social Security which is a retirement program (best analogy is a pension program) not any form of insurance, public or private.
Can You Name the Largest US Program to ANNUALLY Collect More Than It Spent for 75 Straight Years?
- 28/02/2013 11:03:18 PM
1468 Views
Medicare? *NM*
- 28/02/2013 11:38:22 PM
620 Views
No, Medicare has only been around about half as long.
- 28/02/2013 11:56:32 PM
949 Views
Medicare has its own problems, and caused many more. You really do not want to have this debate.
- 03/03/2013 03:03:15 PM
878 Views
No, I do not, because Medicare and torts are invariably scapegoated for all problems with healthcare
- 04/03/2013 12:52:37 AM
949 Views
I can argue with anyone on this (and have) btut first we need to break out that dictionary
- 04/03/2013 04:45:06 AM
860 Views
I am sure you can and have; ability to form arguments does not automatically grant them validity.
- 11/03/2013 09:56:11 PM
935 Views
Like I said, short conversation, once everyone uses the same definitions.
- 13/03/2013 03:28:52 PM
940 Views
From the way you're shitting yourself with glee, I'm going to say Social Security.
- 01/03/2013 12:45:50 AM
1059 Views
Also unlike Ponzis, Social Security was not meant to profit—it just did anyway. For 75 years.
- 01/03/2013 01:55:46 AM
902 Views
It is a "Ponzi" by definition, any argument to the contrary just makes you look ignorant.
- 02/03/2013 12:02:46 PM
970 Views
Wait: An insurer is saying insurance is a Ponzi scheme? 
- 04/03/2013 12:56:30 AM
933 Views
- 04/03/2013 12:56:30 AM
933 Views
You are making even lese sense than usual... Quite an acomplishment. *NM*
- 04/03/2013 03:31:39 AM
555 Views
Maybe, but my math usually checks, and I never have to explain what I omitted.
- 11/03/2013 09:55:50 PM
1026 Views
My math ALWAYS "checks" - it isn't personal, you are just making absolutely no sense, *NM*
- 13/03/2013 03:27:11 PM
496 Views
It's the world's greatest Ponzi scheme, since the government forces us to give money to it.
- 01/03/2013 01:05:05 PM
890 Views
Yes, "government forcing people to give money" defines a Ponzi; speeding tickets are Ponzis.
- 01/03/2013 03:53:02 PM
993 Views
- 01/03/2013 03:53:02 PM
993 Views
Good lord my friend.....
- 02/03/2013 04:19:35 AM
925 Views
I will just link what Isaac said; maybe then you will pay attention to it.
- 02/03/2013 04:56:34 AM
982 Views
I really think you terribly misread what I said *NM*
- 02/03/2013 06:59:56 AM
505 Views
I really do not think I did.
- 04/03/2013 01:43:02 AM
1014 Views
I'm pretty confident you have
- 04/03/2013 11:49:19 AM
995 Views
We evidently disagree on what constitutes a Ponzi scheme.
- 11/03/2013 09:56:27 PM
922 Views
No, I agree with a clear definiton, you seem not to want to absorb that
- 11/03/2013 10:24:47 PM
1098 Views
Re: Yes, "government forcing people to give money" defines a Ponzi; speeding tickets are Ponzis.
- 02/03/2013 12:22:34 PM
990 Views
- 02/03/2013 12:22:34 PM
990 Views
Fraud="money contributed is NOT invested for the contributor, but instead redistributed to others"?
- 04/03/2013 12:51:30 AM
928 Views
You can try and misrepresent what I have said all you want, you are still wrong.
- 04/03/2013 03:45:24 AM
994 Views
Dude, how is QUOTING you misrepresenting you?! And why must I ALWAYS ask that in these threads?
- 11/03/2013 09:56:18 PM
974 Views
- 11/03/2013 09:56:18 PM
974 Views
Well, can you get more wrong?
- 13/03/2013 03:45:08 PM
885 Views
Okay, that's a really weird or naive standard to judge SS by
- 01/03/2013 05:25:11 PM
937 Views
Great; will you put that on a postcard to Cannoli, A2K, Rick Perry and the rest of your party?
- 01/03/2013 07:39:44 PM
974 Views
- 01/03/2013 07:39:44 PM
974 Views
I don't think I'd be telling them anything they don't already know... I mostly agree with them
- 02/03/2013 05:38:56 AM
1105 Views
Means testing is flat out WRONG, and the contribution limit is a sticky debate
- 02/03/2013 12:43:09 PM
906 Views
Tell that to him not me, I didn't express an opinion and my implied one obviously doesn't favor it
- 02/03/2013 05:28:14 PM
1009 Views
I was, I just hit the repy under the wrong post. He was the first to bering the two topics up. *NM*
- 03/03/2013 04:09:34 AM
492 Views
It is insurance against old age poverty, not a longevity lottery.
- 04/03/2013 02:00:24 AM
1011 Views
It is not insurance, it is a pension plan, that also contains an overpriced LT disability insurance.
- 04/03/2013 04:00:42 AM
1006 Views
Social Security Insurance; says so right on the label.
- 11/03/2013 09:53:33 PM
1142 Views
You can call it BedroomWindowVitamins but it does not change what it acutally IS.
- 13/03/2013 04:34:42 PM
906 Views
"Sustainable"=/="profitable;" bankruptcy was not always a given, as your fellows claim..
- 04/03/2013 01:35:04 AM
904 Views
Sustainable often means profitable, they are not universally synonmous but both at once is ideal
- 04/03/2013 12:25:45 PM
901 Views
That is the IDEAL, but NOT point: Sustainability needs no profit, yet profit ensures sustainability.
- 11/03/2013 09:56:48 PM
1366 Views
Your attacks on republican ideals would have more credit if you understood them
- 02/03/2013 04:27:34 AM
958 Views
An ironic charge, since their defenses of those ideals typically suffer from the same defect.
- 02/03/2013 04:51:32 AM
926 Views
- 02/03/2013 04:51:32 AM
926 Views
I'm rubber you're glue, whatever you say bounces of me and sticks to you. nyah, nyah, nyah
- 02/03/2013 12:58:10 PM
867 Views
"Unsustainable"=/="meeting monthly obligations for 75 YEARS and still having $2.5 trillion left."
- 04/03/2013 01:03:09 AM
1000 Views
Please look up the definition of sustainable. Hint: "its worked so far" isn't it.
- 04/03/2013 04:25:19 AM
980 Views
"As it is currently constructed/funded" is one HELL of a qualifier.
- 04/03/2013 04:41:30 AM
1023 Views
You just don't get it, or apparently are so in love with your political ideology you won't.
- 04/03/2013 04:58:15 AM
826 Views
I believe if you check civilizations record you will find the human population has steadily risen.
- 04/03/2013 05:08:38 AM
894 Views
*sigh*
- 04/03/2013 12:15:22 PM
898 Views
Birth RATES have fallen; POPULATION steadily rose in every period except the Black Deaths peak.
- 11/03/2013 09:56:36 PM
1190 Views
Ironic that you would make my point while arguing against
- 04/03/2013 06:12:29 PM
825 Views
?
- 11/03/2013 09:56:59 PM
1007 Views
you mistate his posistion and then rationalize that you know what he really meant
- 13/03/2013 12:06:44 PM
853 Views
aH yes the great liberal investmetn/retirement plan that offers me a NEGATIGVE rate of return...
- 02/03/2013 11:51:50 AM
883 Views
Do you sincerely believe people earning $14,560/year can afford investing 4% of it?
- 04/03/2013 12:53:30 AM
1050 Views
*sigh*
- 04/03/2013 03:43:08 AM
868 Views
I tried it with compound interest; $44.80/month at 4% for 50 years still does not get to $1.25 mill.
- 04/03/2013 04:24:51 AM
927 Views
Here are some clues.
- 04/03/2013 04:37:39 AM
808 Views
It is math, not the Riddle of the Sphinx: EIther it adds up or does not.
- 04/03/2013 05:02:39 AM
948 Views
Math is simple - Either you know how to calculate it or you don't
- 04/03/2013 11:55:24 AM
1066 Views
SS is supposed to supplement a proper pension, not provide your sole income after retirement
- 05/03/2013 03:53:03 AM
827 Views
Did you bother to actually read anything?
- 05/03/2013 02:32:16 PM
894 Views
do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means?
- 05/03/2013 05:49:14 PM
972 Views
Re: do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means? --- yeah, I've BEEN there.
- 05/03/2013 08:01:33 PM
918 Views
how about respond to a post with logic and civility instead of being a troll for once?
- 05/03/2013 11:03:00 PM
1037 Views
All I have used is civility and logic, or least as much civility as was warrented.
- 06/03/2013 04:28:04 AM
972 Views
yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level....
- 08/03/2013 07:22:24 PM
1023 Views
Re: yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level....
- 10/03/2013 01:42:26 PM
886 Views
i'm not going to keep going in circles so i will finish with this....
- 11/03/2013 10:08:53 PM
1186 Views
"Rah! Rah! Rah!" Can we please cut out all this blather and bile?
- 05/03/2013 11:53:41 PM
894 Views