Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 25, 9:15 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
Not the spending for war material. It was the deficit spending, including the investments made in updated manufacturing, and the debt-based income that suddenly was in the pockets of workers producing war material. The war material itself was a dead loss in economic terms. Since the economy doesn't need that kind of stimulus now, and because the stimulus now is a smaller proportion of GDP, most of what we see from war production is the part that's a dead loss. And it is not exactly nonproductive activity. There will be an increase in demand for building materials which will create jobs. But the building materials are not creating *growth* in the housing stock. They're just replacing the stock that was burned. After the buildings are rebuilt, there will be no net increase in the housing stock. After all of that money and that work, we will just be back to where we were before the fire. I am not advocating creating wars or forest fires to stimulate the economy, but just noting that they will stimulate the economy, not create a recession. If we were in a recession and needed stimulus, it might help. As it is, not. -- Ed Huntress Never meant to say it would have a lot of effect, or that we needed it. Just that it would not tip us into a recession. The effect, if any, would be the other direction. It reduces the supply of some things. And therefore tends to increase prices. You are right in my opinion. It will not have a long term effect. Dan |
#42
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 25, 1:57 pm, " wrote:
On Oct 25, 2:36 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote: I would tend to disagree. Where will the money come from to fuel this economic activity? One possibility is that people will collect insurance. Another is that faced with loss of property, more wifes will go to work. Credit has all but dried up. As far as I can tell credit has not dried up. I keep getting applications for credit cards, and the advertisements on TV still say borrow money from DiTech. The fed lowered the discount rate recently, so more money is available. The people who have lost their homes and businesses do not have the cash sitting in the bank. The banks will not loan them money without state and federal guarantees. Did they have state or federal guarantees in order to borrow the money to buy the houses before? What has changed to make federal or state guarantees necessary now? Would a bank not loan money to someone with a job and land to build on? Do banks no longer require insurance on houses that they loan money on? The housing report just yesterday noted a drop of 8%. You don't build more product in a market that has an excess...unless you want to lose money...and the banks have been dealt massive losses already with the majority yet to come. If there was an excess of houses on the market, then this will help eliminate the excess and therefore stimulate the economy. It was also just recently reported that the size of loans needed to finance this activity has essentially ceased. I think the troubles of our neighbors here in California have just begun. And let us not forget that the rebuilding in New Orleans is years behind....because the promised Federal aid has not happened. Why should California be any different? As for a recession....better do some homework, one is coming just in time for the 2008 election year. Lets see, the stock market is near all time highs, the unemployment rate is fairly low. Nope, I see a recession a bit further in the future even though we have had a long ride in the present boom. A recent editorial in the WSJ predicted a recession if the Democrats pass large increases in taxes. But Charles Rangel seems to be smarter than that. Dan And that was before this disaster in California. TMT- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Not to be insulting but you obviously need to do some homework. Walk into your bank and ask the loan officer for a 500K loan. You won't get it. The people who just lost their homes will need this kind of money. Their asset just burned to the ground. Insurance money...IF it is paid out...will not cover rebuilding. Companies are already trying to weasle out of paying....it was an act of God. Meanwhile the bank still wants their mortgage payment by the end of the month. TMT TMT |
#43
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
wrote in message ups.com... snip Never meant to say it would have a lot of effect, or that we needed it. Just that it would not tip us into a recession. The effect, if any, would be the other direction. It reduces the supply of some things. And therefore tends to increase prices. You are right in my opinion. It will not have a long term effect. It probably will cost no more than a few days' expenditure in Iraq. That one is the big drain that's going to be felt sooner or later. The building trades in CA ought to get a good shot in the arm, as you say. -- Ed Huntress |
#44
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 26, 12:42 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
Not to be insulting but you obviously need to do some homework. Walk into your bank and ask the loan officer for a 500K loan. You won't get it. I kind of did that a few months back. It was not going to be a problem. Of course I was looking at about 400k$, but I did not get any indication that more would be a problem. The people who just lost their homes will need this kind of money. Their asset just burned to the ground. Insurance money...IF it is paid out...will not cover rebuilding. Loan companies are usually very good at being sure that the collateral for any loan is insured for more than the amount of the loan. Now often the amount owed is based on what the cost was to buy, not the cost to rebuild. So the insurance may not be enough to cover rebuilding, but is almost sure to cover more than the amount owed. Companies are already trying to weasle out of paying....it was an act of God. Fire insurance is fire insurance. On the other hand insurance for wind damage is not flood insurance. I don't have any flood insurance, but don't expect I will need any. Dan Meanwhile the bank still wants their mortgage payment by the end of the month. TMT |
#45
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
"cavelamb himself" wrote in message ... Steve R. wrote: "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message ups.com... On Oct 23, 1:12 pm, Gunner Asch wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:11:52 -0700, "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote: I'm in amazement "authorities said. Hundreds of homes were lost in the same communityfours years ago." It seems like there is some flaw in our education system. Stu Fields yet the same group that controls the educational system demands we rebuild New Orleans at taxpayer expense...... "Tom Gardner" wrote in message . .. "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message oglegroups.com... Quite a fire we have burning here.... TMT I have a bit less sympathy for people that build in wilderness areas, flood plains or below sea level and then are surprised when Mother Nature intrudes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So Gunner...when is Bush scheduled for his photo op? You know...like in New Orleans? TMT Never mind, help is on the way. British Columbia is sending the giant Martin Mars water bombers. I have seen them working when they fought some fires near where I live. Back in the 1960s I used to park a Cessna 150 under the starboard wing of one, with several other light aircraft. The Mars were being converted to water bombers at that time. Steve R. Steve? The Mars in NOT an amphibian, is it? So just how deep were you parking that 150? Yes, they are amphibians, at least I thinks so. They had wheels at the time. Dollies would be no problem though, as one end of the main runway is just across the road from a beach. There has been a ramp to haul out sea planes since WW2. The airport here is on a peninsula, There were 4 Martin Mars to start with. One pranged, and another became a parts plane. Two are still flying. They are based at Sprout Lake in central Vancouver Island. The water tanks can hold 7,200 US gallons of fire retardant, or just water. They can skim the surface of a water body to refill, literally on the fly! Fascinating to watch! Steve R. -- Reply address munged to bugger up spammers |
#46
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
Steve R. wrote:
"cavelamb himself" wrote in message ... Steve R. wrote: "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message groups.com... On Oct 23, 1:12 pm, Gunner Asch wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:11:52 -0700, "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote: I'm in amazement "authorities said. Hundreds of homes were lost in the same communityfours years ago." It seems like there is some flaw in our education system. Stu Fields yet the same group that controls the educational system demands we rebuild New Orleans at taxpayer expense...... "Tom Gardner" wrote in message .. . "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message ooglegroups.com... Quite a fire we have burning here.... TMT I have a bit less sympathy for people that build in wilderness areas, flood plains or below sea level and then are surprised when Mother Nature intrudes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So Gunner...when is Bush scheduled for his photo op? You know...like in New Orleans? TMT Never mind, help is on the way. British Columbia is sending the giant Martin Mars water bombers. I have seen them working when they fought some fires near where I live. Back in the 1960s I used to park a Cessna 150 under the starboard wing of one, with several other light aircraft. The Mars were being converted to water bombers at that time. Steve R. Steve? The Mars in NOT an amphibian, is it? So just how deep were you parking that 150? Yes, they are amphibians, at least I thinks so. They had wheels at the time. Dollies would be no problem though, as one end of the main runway is just across the road from a beach. There has been a ramp to haul out sea planes since WW2. The airport here is on a peninsula, There were 4 Martin Mars to start with. One pranged, and another became a parts plane. Two are still flying. They are based at Sprout Lake in central Vancouver Island. The water tanks can hold 7,200 US gallons of fire retardant, or just water. They can skim the surface of a water body to refill, literally on the fly! Fascinating to watch! Steve R. The Mars has no landing gear. They are strictly a seaplane. They have mistakenly been called a float plane by the local media but that's not the case either. A floatplane is an aircraft fuselage with external floats, such as the Beavers, etc. that are used extensively in Alaska. Jim Chandler |
#47
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
check on the State's insurance coverage ....Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
After a Computer crash and the demise of civilization, it was learned
Gunner Asch wrote on Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:46:56 -0700 in rec.crafts.metalworking : On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:07:02 -0500, Jon Elson wrote: Too_Many_Tools wrote: Quite a fire we have burning here.... This certainly seems to be an EPIC event! There have been some bad fires in Ca before, but this one seems to be FAR, far worse than anything I remember. Loss of life has been minimal so far, but the number of temporarily displaced and homeless is just astounding! And, it isn't OVER, yet! How much worse will it get? I am very sorry for these losses, and I hope none of the people on this group have lost their shops or other property. Jon With the California (and national) housing market bubble bursting...perhaps one can be comforted by thinking of this as wholesale "jewish lightning " G Gunner I remember when Greyout Davis was governor, and those fires occurred. The question raised then was "Considering the state of California's finances, has anyone checked the State's insurance policies?" pyotr So nu, how does one start a flood? -- pyotr filipivich "Quemadmoeum gladuis neminem occidit, occidentis telum est. " Lucius Annaeus Seneca, circa 45 AD (A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer's hands.) |
#48
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 25, 7:42 pm, " wrote:
On Oct 26, 12:42 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote: Not to be insulting but you obviously need to do some homework. Walk into your bank and ask the loan officer for a 500K loan. You won't get it. I kind of did that a few months back. It was not going to be a problem. Of course I was looking at about 400k$, but I did not get any indication that more would be a problem. The people who just lost their homes will need this kind of money. Their asset just burned to the ground. Insurance money...IF it is paid out...will not cover rebuilding. Loan companies are usually very good at being sure that the collateral for any loan is insured for more than the amount of the loan. Now often the amount owed is based on what the cost was to buy, not the cost to rebuild. So the insurance may not be enough to cover rebuilding, but is almost sure to cover more than the amount owed. Companies are already trying to weasle out of paying....it was an act of God. Fire insurance is fire insurance. On the other hand insurance for wind damage is not flood insurance. I don't have any flood insurance, but don't expect I will need any. Dan Meanwhile the bank still wants their mortgage payment by the end of the month. TMT- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dan, The credit crisis didn't exist a couple of months ago. I have talked to several bankers...they aren't lending to anyone who represents risk. And let us not forget that the asset they did have is gone. The value of the land has also declined....they are in a known burn zone now. What do you think the homes that burned in 2003 and now in 2007 will sell for? The answer is less..far less than what they were worth just a few days ago. Meanwhile someone still has a financial obiligation to pay a mortgage for that burnt out house. Fire insurance is NOT fire insurance. Just because you have been paying premiums does not guarantee any payout later. Act of God, torch your own house, neglect to protect your home...there are many ways to get out of a policy. I had a neighbor have a house burn down...and then they found out the mortgage company had not been paying the insurance company. Take a hard look at Katrina and the insurance mess down South...California has the problem coming. Insurance companies don't like to lose money...ever. TMT |
#49
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 27, 6:09 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
The credit crisis didn't exist a couple of months ago. Actually the credit situation has not changed much in the last few months. The general public is a lot more aware now that the mortgage companies are tightening their requierments to get a loan. But that happened a few months back. My credit union is advertising that rates are lower now. I have talked to several bankers...they aren't lending to anyone who represents risk. I don't think they loaned to anyone that represented risk before. They just have adjusted their idea of risk. A year ago they counted on the price of housing to rise and used that assumption to make loans. I am sure that I can still get a loan and expect that I will get a loan sometime next year. Even though I am not employed, I do not represent risk. And let us not forget that the asset they did have is gone. The value of the land has also declined....they are in a known burn zone now. The price of the land ought to have declined, but I doubt if it has. The price is certain to increase in the next ten years. What do you think the homes that burned in 2003 and now in 2007 will sell for? The answer is less..far less than what they were worth just a few days ago. Houses that burned are not really houses anymore. Meanwhile someone still has a financial obiligation to pay a mortgage for that burnt out house. Not for the burnt out house. An obligation to pay on the loan. Fire insurance is NOT fire insurance. Just because you have been paying premiums does not guarantee any payout later. Act of God, torch your own house, neglect to protect your home...there are many ways to get out of a policy. I don't think you will find Act of God. I had a neighbor have a house burn down...and then they found out the mortgage company had not been paying the insurance company. So the mortgage company is liable because they did not pay for the insurance. Take a hard look at Katrina and the insurance mess down South...California has the problem coming. Insurance companies don't like to lose money...ever. I don't either. But sometimes thing don't go like I plan. TMT |
#50
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 27, 1:57 pm, " wrote:
On Oct 27, 6:09 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote: The credit crisis didn't exist a couple of months ago. Actually the credit situation has not changed much in the last few months. The general public is a lot more aware now that the mortgage companies are tightening their requierments to get a loan. But that happened a few months back. My credit union is advertising that rates are lower now. I have talked to several bankers...they aren't lending to anyone who represents risk. I don't think they loaned to anyone that represented risk before. They just have adjusted their idea of risk. A year ago they counted on the price of housing to rise and used that assumption to make loans. I am sure that I can still get a loan and expect that I will get a loan sometime next year. Even though I am not employed, I do not represent risk. And let us not forget that the asset they did have is gone. The value of the land has also declined....they are in a known burn zone now. The price of the land ought to have declined, but I doubt if it has. The price is certain to increase in the next ten years. What do you think the homes that burned in 2003 and now in 2007 will sell for? The answer is less..far less than what they were worth just a few days ago. Houses that burned are not really houses anymore. Meanwhile someone still has a financial obiligation to pay a mortgage for that burnt out house. Not for the burnt out house. An obligation to pay on the loan. Fire insurance is NOT fire insurance. Just because you have been paying premiums does not guarantee any payout later. Act of God, torch your own house, neglect to protect your home...there are many ways to get out of a policy. I don't think you will find Act of God. I had a neighbor have a house burn down...and then they found out the mortgage company had not been paying the insurance company. So the mortgage company is liable because they did not pay for the insurance. Take a hard look at Katrina and the insurance mess down South...California has the problem coming. Insurance companies don't like to lose money...ever. I don't either. But sometimes thing don't go like I plan. TMT- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dan, it would seem that we have to agree to disagree. I know that everything that I have said is based on personal experience and knowledge ..I know it is and has happened. If it differs with you, so be it. I am more than willing to sit back and watch this play out...check back in six months and I would wager that my comments match reality. If you want to do some homework...check out my comments after Katrina...I was right on the money. TMT |
#51
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 27, 7:33 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
Dan, it would seem that we have to agree to disagree. I know that everything that I have said is based on personal experience and knowledge ..I know it is and has happened. If it differs with you, so be it. I am more than willing to sit back and watch this play out...check back in six months and I would wager that my comments match reality. If you want to do some homework...check out my comments after Katrina...I was right on the money. TMT It is also likely that what you see depends on where you sit. The Seattle real estate market is still going up. Zillow shows my house value has gone up by 82 % since Jan 2003 and is currently at a peak. But even so I think the media is making it as big a deal as they can of the news. Where are you located? Dan |
#52
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
On Oct 27, 1:33 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:57 pm, " wrote: On Oct 27, 6:09 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote: The credit crisis didn't exist a couple of months ago. Actually the credit situation has not changed much in the last few months. The general public is a lot more aware now that the mortgage companies are tightening their requierments to get a loan. But that happened a few months back. My credit union is advertising that rates are lower now. I have talked to several bankers...they aren't lending to anyone who represents risk. I don't think they loaned to anyone that represented risk before. They just have adjusted their idea of risk. A year ago they counted on the price of housing to rise and used that assumption to make loans. I am sure that I can still get a loan and expect that I will get a loan sometime next year. Even though I am not employed, I do not represent risk. And let us not forget that the asset they did have is gone. The value of the land has also declined....they are in a known burn zone now. The price of the land ought to have declined, but I doubt if it has. The price is certain to increase in the next ten years. What do you think the homes that burned in 2003 and now in 2007 will sell for? The answer is less..far less than what they were worth just a few days ago. Houses that burned are not really houses anymore. Meanwhile someone still has a financial obiligation to pay a mortgage for that burnt out house. Not for the burnt out house. An obligation to pay on the loan. Fire insurance is NOT fire insurance. Just because you have been paying premiums does not guarantee any payout later. Act of God, torch your own house, neglect to protect your home...there are many ways to get out of a policy. I don't think you will find Act of God. I had a neighbor have a house burn down...and then they found out the mortgage company had not been paying the insurance company. So the mortgage company is liable because they did not pay for the insurance. Take a hard look at Katrina and the insurance mess down South...California has the problem coming. Insurance companies don't like to lose money...ever. I don't either. But sometimes thing don't go like I plan. TMT- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dan, it would seem that we have to agree to disagree. I know that everything that I have said is based on personal experience and knowledge ..I know it is and has happened. If it differs with you, so be it. I am more than willing to sit back and watch this play out...check back in six months and I would wager that my comments match reality. If you want to do some homework...check out my comments after Katrina...I was right on the money. TMT- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - In reference with my discussion on fire insurance..... TMT http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1029/p13s03-wmgn.html How to ensure good insurance States and watchdog groups track 'complaint ratios' and more. By G. Jeffrey MacDonald | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor As Californians scorched by this month's wildfires pick through the charred remains of hundreds of lost homes and businesses, the dire scene points to a weighty question: Will insurers cover costs to rebuild? Fire victims aren't the only ones with a stake in the answer. Insurance consumers everywhere want to know they're dealing with fair underwriters, and few situations suggest fairness - or lack thereof - as poign*antly as a company's response to a natural disaster. But according to consumer advocates, people wanting to buy insurance from an ethical operator need not rely solely on cautionary tales from the grapevine. There are additional ways, they say, to figure out which companies treat their customers fairly and which ones don't. These include information tracked by state departments of insurance and by industry and watchdog groups. "You need to go to someplace that provides some comprehensive information, as opposed to stories and anecdotes from individuals with bad experiences," says Sally Greenberg, executive director of the National Consumers League, a Washington, D.C.-based consumer advocacy group. The reason: Horror stories aren't necessarily representative of client experience with a company. The ethical practices of insurance companies have come under fresh scrutiny in recent years. On the downside, Gulf Coast claimants who lost just about everything in hurricane Katrina are in many cases still fighting for payouts more than two years after the disaster. On the upside, insurers have at times won praise for waiving deductibles after multiple disasters hit a region, a trend reportedly jump-started by MetLife after a series of hurricanes hit Florida in 2004. Consumers eager to work with the insurance industry's good guys should weigh two primary considerations, advocates say: access and claims. That's because people across the spectrum need to be able to get coverage at affordable prices, just as they need their policies honored when they have a legitimate claim, says Bob Hunter, director of insurance for the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), an advocacy group. He's also former insurance commissioner for Texas. But this dual consideration means consumers sometimes need to make some tough choices. "Poor people need insurance just as much as we do - or maybe more, in some regards, because they're more vulnerable," Mr. Hunter says, "and yet they tend to be priced out. So if a company has systems that, in my view, really target poor people as people to raise prices on - if that's true, and I think it is - then that's a serious potential problem, an ethical problem for me as a buyer." Hunter cautions that some companies seem to harbor biases against minorities and low-income people. He objects, for instance, to auto insurance giant GEICO's use of education and occupation as factors to determine a driver's risk. Through a formula, he says, domestic workers and high school dropouts pay higher premiums to GEICO than do their better-educated counterparts who have identical driving records. His tip for ethical consumers: Beware when an insurer starts asking about your schooling and your job. Even though you might get a good rate, your less-educated neighbor may be paying an exorbitant fee due to an unfair process. "A lot of people don't think about how this classification system works," Hunter says. "I think most people say, 'Oh, the rate is $50 less, I'll take it.' They don't [realize], 'The reason I'm paying $50 less is because some poor people over there have to pay $100 more.' " GEICO spokeswoman Christine Tasher declined to comment on company practices. The American Insurance Asso**ciation (AIA), a trade group for property and casualty insurers, defends such risk-calculating means as legitimate ones that have passed muster in a highly regulated industry. Industry defends risk yardsticks "It's absolutely incorrect to argue that those things that are permitted by state law are in any way improper for the companies that do them," says David Snyder, vice president and assistant general counsel at AIA. "The best definition of fairness is a rate which most accurately reflects risk. Some advocacy groups don't like some risk measurements versus others. That's a matter of preference.... But all [measurements] comply with the law. The law punishes things like discrimination on the basis of race, religion, and national origin. And that's vigorously enforced by state regulators." To determine a company's track record for settling claims fairly, consumers have a range of tools at their disposal. Armed with a little knowledge about where to look and which questions to ask, they can discern a firm's ethical portrait without investing a lot of time or money. One core indicator is a company's complaint ratio. This figure indicates how a company's track record for satisfied customers stacks up against the competition. A ratio of 0.1 to 0.3 suggests good performance vis-à-vis the median for a particular insurance market (marked by a score of "1"). A number higher than 1 suggests a relatively large number of complaints per customer served. 'Complaint ratios' available online To see a company's complaint ratio in a particular state, try visiting the website for that state's department of insurance. To view a firm's national performance, check out aggregated complaint data on the website of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. One tip from NAIC president-elect and Kansas Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger: Watch out for firms mired in disagreements over benefits. Her example: Companies "sometimes will dispute whether a house hit by a tornado was totally destroyed," Ms. Praeger says. "If a portion of the house is left standing, they may not want to pay the policy limit. Those kinds of complaints, I think, demonstrate that perhaps a company is not living up to its contract." She echoes advice from advocates: Call the state insurance department. Some websites offer quick summaries of many customers' experiences with particular companies. J.D. Power and Associates, for instance shows which auto insurers got the highest and lowest marks from surveyed customers who had been in collisions. Best ratings go to USAA and Amica. Worst ratings: Allstate, Farmers, Progressive, and Safeco, among others. For certain information on perceived fairness, ethically minded consumers need to pay. Greenberg recommends Consumers' Checkbook for shoppers in metro areas covered by its service. For a $30 subscription, consumers can research a firm before they buy and determine from aggregated feedback whether other customers have, on the whole, felt that they received fair treatment. What behavior of stock reveals Still, thrifty consumers can learn a lot just by reading between the lines. Kevin Flynn, president of HealthCare Advocates, a private advocacy firm in Philadelphia, suggests using two proxies that help predict when an insurance company is likely to get more aggressive in denying claims. If an insurer's stock price is falling faster than stock market indices, he says, it's probably only a matter of time before the firm starts clamping down on claims paid or hiking premiums to raise funds. He also suggests asking a company's communications office about claims paid as a percentage of revenue. The closer to 100 percent, he says, the better. Unethical behavior among some insurers "is always there," Mr. Flynn says. "You'll simply find it as they get into cash flow crunches." |
#53
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Raging Calif. fires burn scores of homes
248 lines?
Trying to boost your stats? Look, if you won't pretend you wrote all this, I won't pretend I read it. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Combi Boiler - To Burn Or Not To Burn | UK diy | |||
100% financing for scores below 600, 90% for below 550 | Home Ownership | |||
1987 homes compare to newer homes | Home Repair | |||
Transeastern Homes/Ashton Woods Homes in FL | Home Ownership | |||
couple buying house and credit scores- me too! | Home Ownership |