Insurance Hikes?

LOL.. we seem to be in agreement on another issue..Stephen.. Scary, ain't
it..

 

The opposition to the "pay at the pump plan" came from quite a few different
directions.. TMRA II opposed the idea from the get go.. Of course, insurance
companies opposed the plan, because of obvious reasons.. The cost of the
price of gasolene per gallon was envisioned as being atronomically high..
Under the existing legislation, that would be true..Eliminating some of the
state taxes on the per gallon price of the product would almost balance that
cost.. Limiting the number of operators who would bid on the contract with
the state would furthur enhance the cost per gallon.. The litigation cost
would virtually be eliminated and that would furthur minimize the financial
exposure for the consumer.. Now.. you will find the opposition to the plan
and the motives for much of the opposition.. First consider the market share
to the insurance companies.. Then the donations from the insurance companies
to the political power structure.. The cost for the litigation would
disappear.. Special interests of the oil companies and insurance industry
would lose considerable market share.. etc..etc.. Those are the forces of
opposition and it is understandable that disappearing revenues would cause
them to spend considerable time and energy to effectively fight to retain
that market.. I'm not sure which states, if any.. subscribe to the plan of
"pay at the pump".. it is a fact, however, that any state which considered
such a proposal, dealt with the fierce opposition.. The consumer is the only
beneficiary, and the companies involved lose a lucrative market that has
been created by legislation.. Pros and cons...

Bill Walker
Irving

 

I never suggested that the "PIP"(party in power) is not insurance
friendly, nor that Perry is a pub. I just asked for evidence where
the insurance mess did/would dissolve if/when a dem was there?

I assume that you think/know this is the case?


Gary

 

No, these analogies are absolutely relevant. Regarding my constit-
utional reference, it means that without options, the law can/will
come under scrutiny for constitutional challenge.

Ya'll have he option of becoming this "privileged" class that you
mention, and then you can access all these "loopholes" anytime
you want.

Gary

 

Evidently you don't follow this n/g very closely.. Otherwise, you would be
aware that I believe the voters in this state contribute to the corruption
that is involved in the insurance structure.. Your comment was to the effect
that I "boil everything down to dem/repub".. There is no secret that I am a
Democrat.. You are obviously Republican.. Your vote has enabled the worst of
generations of corrupt, so-called republicans to be elected to leadership
offices in our state and nation.. The insurance issue has been in
controversy for many years in our state.. If you are satisfied with the
status quo, then by all means STFU and enjoy..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

 

OH.. I get it.. Pay your obscene premiums and smile.. Then STFU .. I don't
care if the insurance premiums equal the value of the home or vehicle, for
people like you...

 

Pay attention here, Rothstein.. You and I are full of crap.. Nurick and this
guy who posts "Family" or whatever are happy with the status quo and don't
see any reason to make any effort to improve the insurance.. Do you suppose
they might have vested interest in the insurance industry ? Or.. would you
assume that neither owns vehicle or property that is required to be
insured.. LOL.. Either way.. I love the double speak that both are
spouting..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx..

 

Nossir.. I didn't mis-interpret anything.. Your posts have been very clear..
I haven't advocated any "clean-up" candidate.. My position has been very
clear all along.. The voters are repsonsible for the mess that we have
allowed these corporatist politicians to get us into.. Our lack of oversight
has been tacit approval for them to sink into the depths of corruption.. The
first step that I envision is to get rid of the corrupt ones.. Keep the ones
who are trying to correct the situation.. Replace the corrupt incumbents
with leaders who will represent their constituents .. Then to support and
provide the oversight that hopefully will ensure that corruption is
minimized in the future.. Apathy and unconcern is the worst enemy of
democracy.. Integrity and courage is required to maintain it.. If you resent
my posts, then perhaps you should examine your own contributions to the
world we live in..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

 

Appreciate the clarification.. Seems that you are willing to change the
system as long as it doens't involve going after the leadership that is
forcing the corrupt policies on us.. There are a lot of candidates and
incumbents working hard to represent the interests of their constituents..
Many have the "solutions" that you keep pressing about.. You just don't seem
to favor those solutions when they involve getting rid of the corrupt
leaders.. All the nonsense of "evidence", prove it and so forth are phony..
Get over it or be satisfied with the situation the way it is..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

 

You're right, but Bill seems to always want to blame the "pubs".

Really, what I meant was to show me evidence how the insurance
industry was better, or the way he(Bill) thought it should be, because
the "dems" were controlling it/congress/et all.(historical reference).


Gary

 

Bill -

I'll step out on a limb here a bit. To say there is no
regulation on the insurance companies is a bit false. They do have
ceilings, but they are so high that it is almost non-existant. It
does exist, but who cares if you can't afford it?

And now what I am not sure of, I think the limitations only
apply to liability, not to any comprehensive coverages. Not sure on
this one.



--Fullstate

 

Does it piss anyone else off that the insurance companies are allowed
to modify your rates not only based upon your history but on your
credit rating??


--Fullstate