Krauthammer on Obama-care. the coming VAT, etc
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: 83LowRider on 31 Mar 2010 18:17 "saddlebag" wrote Look, the man is not perfect, but given the amount of resistance to anything he tries to do, I think he's done a pretty exceptional job. Still, I have no problem with pundits, network news, or Joe the Plumber taking issue with his policies, provided they can make a reasoned argument of how they could do it better. It's all the Faux news bozos that have to incite their dimwitted audience to violence nightly that I take issue with. ---------- I watch Fox on occasion, but news in general is just too controversial and depressing, so I have been watching much less of it lately. I can find most of what I need in the papers or internet. That said, I don't care a lot for Beck, (much too shrill and Maudlin) but I've seen him a few times and on many of those occasions, he (and others) make reference to the fact that taking up arms is NOT the answer. In that same vane, they've made many references that even those holding up mean spirited signs, or screaming obscenities, are detrimental to the party as a whole. This has held true many times for Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly. I don't listen to Rush, so no opinion there. > Preventing the insurance industry from acting as a robber baron is not > an entitlement, it's good law. The most recent figures show that insurance companies operate on a profit margin of 4 to 41/2 percent. You think that's high, wait until DC starts running it.
From: Bob Myers on 31 Mar 2010 18:35 On 3/31/2010 3:59 PM, .p.jm.(a)see_my_sig_for_address.com wrote: > And no one was 'suckered' into anything. Financing was offerd > to them, the terms I guarantee were fully explained and disclosed ( by > law they have to be ), and then the people made a choice to accept or > decline. > You must have been in some VERY different closings than I've been. I seem to recall that the typical scenario is being presented with a rather large stack of papers - probably totalling ~100 pages at a minimum - many of which are written in legalese and in the proverbial "fine print", which you are then very explicitly encouraged to get through and scrawl your signature on as quickly as possible. It's not like you get a few hours or so to review them at your leisure, or that most buyers would be capable of understanding all the fine points even if you did. Yes, the terms are "disclosed" to exactly the degree required by law (and not one step beyond). But meeting that legal requirement has exactly zero to do with the question of whether or not you are assured of informed buyers. Bob M.
From: Bob Myers on 31 Mar 2010 18:41 On 3/31/2010 4:17 PM, 83LowRider wrote: > The most recent figures show that insurance companies operate > on a profit margin of 4 to 41/2 percent. You think that's high, > wait until DC starts running it. > Anyone have any figures on what the total revenues are in the insurance market overall? I suspect that 4.5% isn't all that small when expressed in dollars, esp. for what is basically a service industry with very minimal capital equipment investments needed and no physical product. Bob M.
From: Vito on 31 Mar 2010 18:55 "83LowRider" <any(a)ddresswilldo.com> wrote | ...... You'd think we'd have learned something from | the first time around. | If that were true we'd have quit electing socialists after FDR.
From: Vito on 31 Mar 2010 19:05
"Bob Myers" <nospamplease(a)address.invalid> wrote , .p.jm.(a)see_my_sig_for_address.com wrote: | > And no one was 'suckered' into anything. ....| | You must have been in some VERY different closings than I've been. I'd like to see a breakdown of how many are in default by: Purchasers buying a home they couldn't afford. Speculators who took an unaffordable loan planning to "flip" the house. Home Equity Loans who's variable rate made them unaffordable. |