Ever try to let free market forces dictate the sustainability of an insurance company when they are considered too big to fail ergo, AIG--which today received another reworked $152 billion handout from the government, despite their utter incompetence and mismanagement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/business/28melt.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp&oref=slogin

And who is giving them the money? The government.

Which is worse, AIG for asking, or the government for giving them the money they ask for.

Let the market decide, which means no government bailouts.

This is exactly why I don't trust the government to run anything more complicated than a lemonade stand. They want to give it all away.

So give each member of congress a lemonade stand, funded out of his own salary, and let him (or her) give away as much of his own money as he wishes

But stop giving money away to corporations as well as citizens.

Mistakes have to hurt in order for folks to learn not to repeat them.

So the government prosecutes AIG in 2004 and in 2008 (just four years later) they're bailing them out. I don't get it.

Don't forget, congress allocates money, so if anyone wants to pin this on the president, remember, congress voted to approve any bailouts.

So thank Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for the bailouts, and your new, larger tax bills.

That’s a good question. What's clear though is that the "too big to fail" paradigm is going viral. Next up is the auto industry, b/c we all want an orderly outcome to this mess, Yet, with consumer spending declining and unemployment rising will the backstopping really help.

Here's a snippet from a NY Times article on AIG.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/business/15aig.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin


What you'll notice is that the trouble AIG is in is NOT related to health insurance or life insurance or annuities, etc.

In fact, most of the problem is due to the mortgage problems, championed by the Democrats and bolstered by their refusal to implement regulatory oversight as offered by Bush and McCain.

Once more it's a case of letting people have the mortgages they couldn't afford GOING IN to the mortgage, because "it's only fair that everyone who wants a house should have a house."

The cascading effect of the mortgage crisis, manufactured by the Congress and their directives to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is horrendous....and the PEOPLE will have to bail them (Congress) out.

Personally, I think they should have fired at least the majority of Senators and Congressmen for negligence. I wonder if we could sue them for "malpractice?"

Okay, why don't we just put an end to this nonsense and just give all the working families in America, or at least the homeowners, a million dollars each instead of all these plans to "help" the mortgage crisis, stabilize things, and stimulate the economy?

It would cost about a third of a trillion dollars and all the taxpayers would be helping "bail out" everyone.

Pay off your own mortgages, invest, buy, stimulate...get DEBT free, especially from those usurous Credit Cards.

This is something I am concerned about. How come no democrats want to lay this crisis at the feet of the people who actually signed up for mortgages they knew, or suspected, they could not pay back?

How come it’s never one’s own fault? At least not in a democrat’s eye?

Because most of the blame, and rightly so, falls on their constituents.

You don't really think they are going to blame the people that put them into office do you? That would be political suicide

Kayla:

Wanted to address something you posted about taxes, my responses are in red:

12.4 + 2.9 + 10% = minimum 25% income tax - if there's no state or local income tax.

However, I disagree with your premise that just because it's not "income tax" doesn't mean it has no impact on our bottom line. It still costs me $1200 (low by comparison to other areas of the country) for my property tax on my tiny little house, and 7% sales tax this year on a new car, and repeated taxation on that car for every year I own it, personal property tax on my husband's massage therapy equipment and computer because the county decides they have a right to tax something he uses for his business every year, regardless of how much (or little) he makes in his practice...

My tally of bottom line is I live on less of my income than the governments do. And since I aspire to make more than $250k in my household income, Obama is going to take my aspirations and tax my profits to oblivion. Why do I bother?

Some people want to earn the American dream. Others want mediocre versions of the American dream handed to them. And they are the ones who contributed to the demise of our economy. Housing without income - the fundamental flaw brought to us by "gasp" Jimmy Carter with the Community Reinvestment Act, which required banks to lend to unqualified borrowers. There are those who want to say no, this wasn't the case, but the first rumble that this subprime lending goes back to the 80s, less than 10 years after CRA, financial markets showed instability. The dots connect up in every decade about ten years apart for those that care to connect them up without partisan partiality. Jimmy Carter meant well. It's a lofty goal. But people who can't prove income can't pay loans!!!! Anyone who wants to blame this on Reagan or Clinton or Bush policies or lack of regulation fail to take into consideration the role of Congress for those several sessions, fails to take in the simple logic that income is required to pay loans! We've been putting off this "day of reckoning" since the 80s - bailing out savings and loan companies, a major trillion dollar mutual fund, and then the bail outs of this year.... And we're putting it off again if you really want a reality check on how scary this is... there are a lot of non-partisan books on the subject - everybody gets the blame! Right down to the consumer who uses his credit cards (big hint if you want a clue as to the next financial market that could fall and need a bail out)

In general, I agree with you. I hate these bailouts (because I already see AIG execs going off to spend $400K at a resort, and other banks using the "bailout money" to pay bonuses to execs and to reward shareholders). And I also question "who is next" - banks, auto makers, then who? You know someone is gonna show up hat in hand!

But I also worry about the downside of giants failing - GM, AIG, GE, etc. I saw estimates that if GM goes, so will 2.5 million jobs.

I don't know where to draw that line between "let them fail" and "gotta save the economy". I am not a big study of the Great Depression, but did the government not lead the charge in getting things back on track? Without the government (and the war), would the economy have worked itself out all by itself? That's what concerns me about letting things "progress" down the spiral free market style.

AGG

AGG - the "problem," from my perspective is sin that leads to the "normal" propensity of humans to GREED. This crosses all boundaries, especially political boundaries.

I really like AIG as a company, especially for things like Life Insurance, but they are "too big" as so many other businesses and banks are. So is the Federal Government. When you begin to get into "everything" it is VERY easy to become a "Jack of all things, Master of none."

That is our Government as it "branches" into areas are that are NOT it's CONSTITUTIONAL areas. They find "ways" to make it "sound as though" what they WANT to do IS somehow a part of the Constitution. But it's all "smoke and mirrors." At the forefront of this problem is the Supreme Court, not the other two branches of government. But even the Supreme Court has fallen prey to this idea of "social activisim" and "a living document" that needs to be "changed" with the "times."

NOW, obviously the BONE HEADS in charge of AIG can't seem to understand that the APPEARANCE of impropriety is just as important as an ACTUAL impropriety. And the PRESS, the willing accomplices of the political parties who WANT the Government to control more and more aspects of our lives, "play it to the hilt." In mock, feigned, or real "outrage" they splash all over the news that the "big guys at AIG" spent a few hundred thousand dollars on a meeting during a time when they are also asking for and receiving "bail out" money.

Personally, I think that they should be fired for "lack of common sense" and replaced with others who haven't been infected with the "well we HAVE to" thinking. Getting together in a nice setting is not wrong. Spending money on a conference is not wrong. But the TIMING is wrong.

But as "bad" as anyone might thing that is, they are "pikers" compared to most of the political parties, and particularly the Democrat party.

So let's "compare" a little to see some of the "balance" that the news organizations WON'T tell us.

Jamie Gorelick - anyone familiar with her? Rumored to be "on the short list" for Attorney General under Obama. Former "2nd" in command to Janet Reno. Former author of the "wall" between the CIA and the FBI that led, most probably, to the 9/11 attacks in 2001 because the two agencies were forbidden by her to talk to each other and share information.

She also worked for Fannie Mae and got paid some 65 MILLION dollars (not a few hundred thousand) for a whopping 5 years of work, during which time the FM and FM where digging the mortgage hole we are now paying for. WHERE is the outrage?

Where is the outrage over what OBAMA was "paid" by FM/FM in HUGE (millions of dollars) "contributions" to his campaign?

Where is the outrage over Barney Frank who had what oversight of FM/FM that there was, and did NOTHING other than to lie to the American people that "all was just fine over at
FM/FM and it was a "Good time" to invest...as late as JULY 2008?

Where is the outrage that the McCain legislation was KILLED by the Democrats that just might have averted the mortgage meltdown mess?

Where is the "outrage" over the huge Political Junkets, "masquerading" as "fact finding trips" that the Pols take, costing the taxpayers HUGE amounts of money, all while they have their hands out for MORE TAX money?

Where is the outrage over the BILLIONS of dollars the USA spends in aid to OTHER countries, when we have BIG PROBLEMS here at home, the ONLY home that the Goverment is Constitutionally required to "take care of FIRST?"

I am sick and tired of all this rhetoric by the "Left" about how "bad" business is. Business, by and large, are "pikers" when it comes to finding ways to spend OUR money compared to Congress (which DOES hold the "purse strings").

Congress doesn't make a PENNY. Government doesn't make a PENNY.
They TAKE hard earned money and confiscate it, to use as THEY want to use it.

The taxation for the Constitutional responsibilities of Government I have no problem with. The "monolithic monster" that Government has become I HAVE a BIG PROBLEM with.

The confiscatory tax policies need to END. The "big and needy" programs of the government need to END and the responsibilities for providing them RETUTNED to the States and to the PEOPLE.

And then there's "Mr. Education is so important" Barack Obama. NOW that he's gotten elected, guess where HIS children are going to go to school? It WON'T be a "public school." But why not? HE supports the Chicago Teachers Union, he wants to "fix" the public education system by throwing even MORE money down a broken sink hole, but it's "not good enough for HIS children and VOUCHERS to give the same sort of CHOICE to the "average [censored] and Jane" is just NOT RIGHT."

Let GM and all the other business' fall. Why not? DON'T talk about the Unions, the Pension Plans, the foreign government support of similar businesses in THEIR countries that give foreign companies an "unfair advantage" in the marketplace.


Yep. You guess it. I am "fed up to here" with the Feds and the MOOCHERS who support them. Create the problems and scream bloody murder that "we have to bail them out!"

Give ME the million dollars and I WILL pay off my mortgage, pay off my car, and INVEST and SPEND and STIMULATE the economy, PAY to support charities to help the needy directly and help some individually. Get the Government FOR the people and OF the people AGAIN that the Founders intended and WARNED us about if they centralize power too much.


No, what we get "treated to" is this sort of garbage: "FH is a part of the immoral, yet, powerful health insurance industry mafia" and "Unlike FH, who as a immoral profiteer on the current health system and is, thus, biased when it comes to the issue of single payer health care."

The "Health Insurance Industry", NOT the Government, is "immoral."

I, personally, am an "immoral profiteer" because I try to find ways to PROTECT people and their assets in the system that we HAVE, and of which the government is "part of the problem."

I am "biased" simply because I earn my living in this "insurance industry."

No one else is "biased" based on where they "Sit." No one else thinks that lawyers are overpaid and that personal responsibility IS important.

NO ONE can "evaluate" the Healthcare Delivery System" that is NOT a politician or a lawyer or wanting someone ELSE to pay for THEIR "problems.

I am REALLY tired of the political teaching of "personal destruction" being more important than a close examination of the real ISSUES and the far-ranging effects of potential solutions.


Perhaps it's simply time to let all the Wayward People have their way and just let them do whatever they want to do with no "opposition" and no attempt to "fix things." IT works for government, why not for individuals.

Have you ever heard of "ordinary Americans" who have been TERRORIZED by the IRS, over TAX issues? NOT the Wesley Snipes sort of "scoff-laws," but ordinary Americans who get into trouble BECAUSE of confiscatory tax policies?

Now, where can I go to get my Concealed Carry License? I think I know just the Christmas present I want and will likely NEED.

Kayla:

You stated this:


Where did I say that?

I just wanted to compare Apples to Oranges.

Income taxes are based on income, calculated however the social engineering of tax policy has decided to tax or not tax.

Real Estate taxes are based on the assessed value of your real estate.

Personal Property Taxes are based on the assessed value of the personal property in your business.

Titling taxes are based on the purchase price of your car.

Sales taxes are based on the purchase price of the items being purchased, and to what is taxed and what is not.

So, we have a whole fruit salad listed above.

KA:

I have clients that write checks to the US Government for $250K in income taxes annually. And then turn over to the Peoples State of Maryland another $40K.

Plus Fica taxes of $14k
Plus Medicare Taxes $3.7k
Plus Local Real Estate taxes of $20k
Sales Taxes of 6% on everything they buy in MD.
Unemployment taxes for $251.
And the list goes on....

They get you coming and going.

Obama ain't going to make it much worse. And Bush didn't do much to change it either.

If you have a household income of $100k or more, your largest personal expense on an annual basis is federal income tax. Closely followed by the amount of Social Security taxes paid by you. Next, might come your house rent/mortgage. This is true, depending on your housing choices, to amounts significantly lower than household income of $100k.

Believe me, I clearly understand the impact of taxes on the below average, the average and the above average households.

The feds want $3 trillion dollars to run the government next year.

Out of a GDP of $10 trillion. That's thirty (30%) percent. They have to get it from somewhere.

And unless your willing to give up Social Security and Medicare, it's only going to go up.

LG

FH,

If only it were that easy. Wouldn't everyone love to get a check for $1 million dollars? There's one problem with that notion, Hyperinflation. The reason money holds it's value is because not everyone has it. If you give that amount out to everyone, it would instantly drop it's value to almost nothing. We would see inflation rates increasing at 50% per month likely sending our country in another great depression.

I understand your frustration with the bailouts, but I'm not sure that the alternative of letting the businesses fail would be any better. Basically, we are screwed and the government knows it.

Hold on to your hat...it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

Want2Stay

Airline Industry

Want2Stay

LG - ESPECIALLY if Obama gets his ADDITIONAL One Trillion Dollars in MORE spending for his "ideas."


Don't you think it's time, past time, for a little "outside the box" thinking?

Everyone thinks the Mortgage Meltdown Crisis is "so bad." It IS bad, but just how long does anyone think the Government itself can be sustained before IT "melts down" because there simply is NOT enough "tax money" out there to continue supporting inflation, let alone INCREASES in spending and NEW spending?


It is, in my opinion, time to consider jettisoning the Republican Party and forming a new party, perhaps called the "Conservative Party" or something similar.

It is time to DISMANTLE a lot of Federal Government "programs" and "largesse" to others. It is time to drill in Alaska, off shore, anywhere. It is time to build nuclear plants, and do everything possible to reduce and/or eliminate our reliance on Oil from countries that are fundamentally opposed to FREEDOM of the people.

It is time to get the "800 pound gorilla" of the Federal Government OFF of the backs of the people.

Just how "Well off" or "Better off" would the AVERAGE taxpayer be if THEY could keep the 30+ percent of their wages to USE as THEY see fit? IF you got a 30% "raise" by not earning one new penny, just in keeping control of what you already have, how many people would be in a position to not only help themselves and their families, but others that they saw "in need" of some help? What, for example, would the "healthcare needs" be like for someone who HAD a serious problem, but where people could GIVE 5% of the 30% to a "healthcare pool" available to anyone who had bills in excess of "some number," say $100,000?

How affordable WOULD health insurance be if the policies that people had LIMITED the payment BY an insurance company to $100,000, and then the "pool" would kick in where the entire nation was funding that pool through their own giving?

OR, if people don't like the idea and think that healthcare is right that the government should provide, why not look at WHY healthcare costs ARE so high? Why not start with the FACT that healthcare has gotten so good that people DON'T DIE. If they would just have the "common decency" of dieing, we wouldn't HAVE such huge medical bills to "live with."

Why not just STOP all the things that medicine does to "prolong" our lives for a few "extra" years? Why not let my sister die from her ruptured brain aneurysm? Why not let the heart attack folks die? Why fight cancer, let them die. We ARE all going to DIE someday, why not today, this week, "in six months," by simply letting "nature take it's course" in the "survival of the fittest?" Nope, it's MUCH easier to "blame the insurance companies."

Nope, it's MUCH easier to turn over more control of our lives to "the government."

Just WHERE does that "control" stop?

For me, it "stops" at the Constitution and the Constitutional REASON for Goverment AND the Constitutional "limits" (needed checks and balances) ON that Goverment IF freedom IS to be preserved. This "unique experiment" in Freedom of the PEOPLE is in grave danger. And the current "incoming regime" is going to do all that it can to solidify the control of government (read that as THEIR control) over YOUR life.

I disagree, Want2Stay.

I'm not talking about printing new money, I'm talking about RETURNING our money to us and NOT giving it to other countries.

Got a "natural disaster" somewhere in the world?

Let the people contribute to charitable organizations for relief if THEY want to.

But let the people who have EARNED the money decide what to spend it on.

IF people have the money to BUY what they want, do you think COMPETITION in the marketplace would INCREASE or DECREASE the cost of items?

Why are airlines, for example, "failing" and "struggling?" Why are "no frills" airlines the NORM today? Fuel costs. Union labor costs. Lack of MONEY in the "coffers" of the individual people who LIKE travel, need travel, but can't afford it as part of their PERSONSAL budget because the Government steals so much of their "hard earned" dollars.

Why is $4.00 gasoline for the car such a big problem? Not because it costs $4.00 but because individual people can't "tax" someone else to increase their available "money supply."

They have to live within their own budget, and MUCH of that budget is dictated by the TAXES that are confiscated from them whether they like it or not, and if something else happens in their lives (like medical expenses) and they can't afford to pay the taxes, THEN the government goes after the individual with a VENGEANCE, putting liens on everything and seizing what little money they DO have in any accounts.

Enough is enough. I think that by the time Barack's first term in office is over, A LOT of "ordinary citizens" will be sick and tired of the "government largesse" with THEIR money.

And I agree that letting the companies fail is not a "good solution," but you can trace just about all of it back to the "taxation" solution to "punish" businesses and the "entitlements" that people think they have to have.

Maybe I'm a bit biased on this, since I live on "straight commission." I don't sell something, I don't eat. But I EARN every penny I do make by trying my best to help others in a system that DOES exist and that IS regulated and controlled BY the government.

And they want to call it "windfall profits taxes." Puke on them. The greatest "Windfall Profits Tax" is the taxation of the people and the deadly and wasteful SPENDING of the Government that doesn't create ONE thing. PROFITS are a "dirty word" to government.

"Zero sum" is the notion they embrace and they just don't want to "get it" that with increased productivity in the nation, the revenues to the government GO UP.

With all the ranting and complaining about health insurance companies......

Does anyone know how much of EACH DOLLAR that is paid in HEALTH INSURANCE premiums are paid back out to Medical Providers


Not necessarily. I'm covered by an HMO.....in VA. Was seen in the ER in NJ and my insurance paid the entire bill minus my $100 co-pay.

JoJo - I understood that her son was Out of State and most HMO's have severe restrictions on Out of State coverage. It's one of the reasons why I often recommend Medical Flight insurance coverage for clients, especially those who like to travel around the country, or even in some cases, around the world.

Additionally, Emergency Care is usually covered, but if further treatment is needed, it usually requires a trip back to the "Network Area."

Also, most coverages "end at the water's edge," so if you do like to travel out of country (including on Cruise ships) you need to be congnizant of what coverages you have or don't have if something happens while not in the USA.

HMO's can work fine, but each has to be evaluated individually for the given client to figure out what might be the "best" type of plan for their needs.