Comments on: Insurance Questions http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html where orders emerge Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:06:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Meridia reviews. http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-55744 Meridia reviews. Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:17:00 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=2372#comment-55744 <strong>Meridia....</strong> Pillinc buy phentermine adipex meridia online.... Meridia….

Pillinc buy phentermine adipex meridia online….

]]> By: Buy cialis online. http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-55619 Buy cialis online. Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:40:01 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=2372#comment-55619 <strong>Cialis....</strong> Cialis best price buy online. Purchase cialis online. Generic cialis apcalis price comparison.... Cialis….

Cialis best price buy online. Purchase cialis online. Generic cialis apcalis price comparison….

]]> By: Tyco http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-45677 Tyco Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:44:12 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=2372#comment-45677 <p>Back to Don's question on why a CEO would ask for Federal Regulation. I think one reason is that it is easier to serve one master than 50. Regulatory costs and uncertainty likely fall in a Fed dominated world. This does not mean that profits will rise for at least three reasons - competition, transfer to consumer surplus and Fed regulations. Federal charter will enable market entry given sharply lowered costs to enter. Regulatory costs will fall for all parties and thus likely to be transferred to consumers. Third the government will likely manage agenda to their congressional benefit (subsidizing high loss states). </p> <p>Thus, Mr. Wilson is incorrectly thinking about his problem. He will get more competition given lower entry costs (managing 50 states), costs reductions will be transfered to consumers (nature of competition), and higher loss costs given government forcing companies to subsidized entire states that have higher costs. </p> <p>A final reason why Mr. Wilson may be pushing a Fed charter is to manage the agenda versus have on hoisted upon him by economically illiterate politicians. Again he may be fooling himself. Is he really more clever than politicians? I would bet against that notion by simply appealing to the fact that there are more of them and they are actually in the game (versus just playing as a spectator). </p> <p>Net, Mr. Wilson is playing a game he does not understand. On the business front he is not fully informed on the real economics of the insurance game when structure is changing. A quick look at earnings and sales suggest that Allstate is loosing profitability and share. Tom and his top leaders can't play the current game. As a political player Mr. Wilson is a neophyte. He like his mentor Mr Liddy (AIG savior) will learn politics is not business. Talk is cheap, real problems always require painful remedies. </p> Back to Don's question on why a CEO would ask for Federal Regulation. I think one reason is that it is easier to serve one master than 50. Regulatory costs and uncertainty likely fall in a Fed dominated world. This does not mean that profits will rise for at least three reasons – competition, transfer to consumer surplus and Fed regulations. Federal charter will enable market entry given sharply lowered costs to enter. Regulatory costs will fall for all parties and thus likely to be transferred to consumers. Third the government will likely manage agenda to their congressional benefit (subsidizing high loss states).

Thus, Mr. Wilson is incorrectly thinking about his problem. He will get more competition given lower entry costs (managing 50 states), costs reductions will be transfered to consumers (nature of competition), and higher loss costs given government forcing companies to subsidized entire states that have higher costs.

A final reason why Mr. Wilson may be pushing a Fed charter is to manage the agenda versus have on hoisted upon him by economically illiterate politicians. Again he may be fooling himself. Is he really more clever than politicians? I would bet against that notion by simply appealing to the fact that there are more of them and they are actually in the game (versus just playing as a spectator).

Net, Mr. Wilson is playing a game he does not understand. On the business front he is not fully informed on the real economics of the insurance game when structure is changing. A quick look at earnings and sales suggest that Allstate is loosing profitability and share. Tom and his top leaders can't play the current game. As a political player Mr. Wilson is a neophyte. He like his mentor Mr Liddy (AIG savior) will learn politics is not business. Talk is cheap, real problems always require painful remedies.

]]> By: Russ Nelson http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-45676 Russ Nelson Sun, 19 Apr 2009 00:41:22 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=2372#comment-45676 <p>Veritas: and in New York State a doctor who wanted to charge a flat fee per month for doctoring, was charged with running an illegal insurance scheme.</p> Veritas: and in New York State a doctor who wanted to charge a flat fee per month for doctoring, was charged with running an illegal insurance scheme.

]]> By: Veritas http://cafehayek.com/2009/04/insurance-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-45675 Veritas Sat, 18 Apr 2009 15:16:23 +0000 http://localhost/wordpress/?p=2372#comment-45675 <p>I hope everyone is aware that in many states, insurance companies are actually required to get their rates and policy forms approved by the insurance regulators before they can begin to charge them to insureds. </p> <p>Rent control is alive and well. </p> I hope everyone is aware that in many states, insurance companies are actually required to get their rates and policy forms approved by the insurance regulators before they can begin to charge them to insureds.

Rent control is alive and well.

]]>