It’s almost like a risk-based assessment is reacting to the high risk of Trump and the Republican efforts to undercut Obamacare. Amazing how that’s the fault of Obamacare rather than the people making it untenable. It’s a bit like if I jumped into you food truck, pissed in your ingredients, shit on your grill and disconnected the fridge then said “look! Foo is not fit to be a chef!”
Wise people build walls around what they value.
They did.
Then you lot voted out those who built the walls and voted in people who only had eyes to destroy it.
Jason wrote:Seb, when there is only one company providing healthcare- healthcare that people are FORCED to purchase or pay a fine- the cost is going to be massive. It is not a coincidence that the price of Obamacare ONLY WENT HIGHER after it was implemented. Add in the fact that every single year, the fine that you had to pay for not purchasing Obamacare also went higher and higher. Eliminate being forced to buy Obamacare, then allow for other insurance companies to get your business, prices will be drastically driven down. This is how basic business works. I can't believe I have to explain something so simple to you.
The reason underwear isn't expensive is because there are countless companies aiming for your business, competing with each other, driving prices down because they want your business. If Hanes were the only company with the super secret formula of making underwear, the price of underwear would be ridiculous. Most people would be going commando unless you were forced to purchase underwear.
Very simple stuff, Seb. I don't even want to know what they're brainwashing you with over there on Colonial Island.
Simple I’m so far as it is simply not how the market or Insurance has operated for the last decades. But nice try.
Perhaps the market doesn't operate like that in your socialist fantasy land, but in the real world, that's how it is done.
Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates not just volume. Go read up on it.
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
Jason wrote:Seb, when there is only one company providing healthcare- healthcare that people are FORCED to purchase or pay a fine- the cost is going to be massive. It is not a coincidence that the price of Obamacare ONLY WENT HIGHER after it was implemented. Add in the fact that every single year, the fine that you had to pay for not purchasing Obamacare also went higher and higher. Eliminate being forced to buy Obamacare, then allow for other insurance companies to get your business, prices will be drastically driven down. This is how basic business works. I can't believe I have to explain something so simple to you.
The reason underwear isn't expensive is because there are countless companies aiming for your business, competing with each other, driving prices down because they want your business. If Hanes were the only company with the super secret formula of making underwear, the price of underwear would be ridiculous. Most people would be going commando unless you were forced to purchase underwear.
Very simple stuff, Seb. I don't even want to know what they're brainwashing you with over there on Colonial Island.
Simple I’m so far as it is simply not how the market or Insurance has operated for the last decades. But nice try.
Perhaps the market doesn't operate like that in your socialist fantasy land, but in the real world, that's how it is done.
Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates not just volume. Go read up on it.
Uh-huh. And what is it called when John Doe goes with Insurance company #2 over #1, #3 and #4 because they offer him the most affordable premium? Do you actually think all insurance companies operate exactly the same?
Jason wrote:Seb, when there is only one company providing healthcare- healthcare that people are FORCED to purchase or pay a fine- the cost is going to be massive. It is not a coincidence that the price of Obamacare ONLY WENT HIGHER after it was implemented. Add in the fact that every single year, the fine that you had to pay for not purchasing Obamacare also went higher and higher. Eliminate being forced to buy Obamacare, then allow for other insurance companies to get your business, prices will be drastically driven down. This is how basic business works. I can't believe I have to explain something so simple to you.
The reason underwear isn't expensive is because there are countless companies aiming for your business, competing with each other, driving prices down because they want your business. If Hanes were the only company with the super secret formula of making underwear, the price of underwear would be ridiculous. Most people would be going commando unless you were forced to purchase underwear.
Very simple stuff, Seb. I don't even want to know what they're brainwashing you with over there on Colonial Island.
Simple I’m so far as it is simply not how the market or Insurance has operated for the last decades. But nice try.
Perhaps the market doesn't operate like that in your socialist fantasy land, but in the real world, that's how it is done.
Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates not just volume. Go read up on it.
Uh-huh. And what is it called when John Doe goes with Insurance company #2 over #1, #3 and #4 because they offer him the most affordable premium? Do you actually think all insurance companies operate exactly the same?
showa58taro wrote:You seem to have undermined your own argument.
You seem to be living on fantasy island.
Because I don’t rely on shit pretend scenarios and straw men? Yeah, that’s what is fantastical in this discussion.
Pretend? This is real life, sir. Why do countless insurance companies exist if you believe they are all based on the same estimates?
Literally never made that point once. See what I mean about straw men. You’re relying on defeating an argument I never made.
Your point is "Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates".
Cool beans. Let's say 4 insurance companies exist. Will they all have the same price tag for John Doe's business, or will they compete with each other to get John Doe's business?
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
We are talking about gold in the world today. If a government passes a law that requires citizens to purchase gold every month or pay a tax penalty, is that action likely to make the price go up or down?
showa58taro wrote:You seem to have undermined your own argument.
You seem to be living on fantasy island.
Because I don’t rely on shit pretend scenarios and straw men? Yeah, that’s what is fantastical in this discussion.
Pretend? This is real life, sir. Why do countless insurance companies exist if you believe they are all based on the same estimates?
Literally never made that point once. See what I mean about straw men. You’re relying on defeating an argument I never made.
Your point is "Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates".
Cool beans. Let's say 4 insurance companies exist. Will they all have the same price tag for John Doe's business, or will they compete with each other to get John Doe's business?
Are you somehow confusing actuarial estimates as a mathematical law or summat? Geez. Like trying to explain things to a dotard. Honestly, go read up on this stuff instead of trying to give these random hypotheticals that are irrelevant bro.
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
We are talking about gold in the world today. If a government passes a law that requires citizens to purchase gold every month or pay a tax penalty, is that action likely to make the price go up or down?
Until you answer my questions then I don’t know what the price of gold would be. The US isn’t the sole purchaser of gold. So your increase in demand if it coincides with a mass decrease because of the current trend in silver and other commodities, combined with low inflation and low risk of recession, likely means Gold is cheaper. If it’s combined with higher interest rates, low GDP growth, and potential recession then the price might skyrocket.
showa58taro wrote:You seem to have undermined your own argument.
You seem to be living on fantasy island.
Because I don’t rely on shit pretend scenarios and straw men? Yeah, that’s what is fantastical in this discussion.
Pretend? This is real life, sir. Why do countless insurance companies exist if you believe they are all based on the same estimates?
Literally never made that point once. See what I mean about straw men. You’re relying on defeating an argument I never made.
Your point is "Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates".
Cool beans. Let's say 4 insurance companies exist. Will they all have the same price tag for John Doe's business, or will they compete with each other to get John Doe's business?
Are you somehow confusing actuarial estimates as a mathematical law or summat? Geez. Like trying to explain things to a dotard. Honestly, go read up on this stuff instead of trying to give these random hypotheticals that are irrelevant bro.
No, you began arguing about how the market operates, then went down the "read up on it, bro", "I never made that point once", "That's a straw man scenario" route. You can't answer a simple question without derailing yourself at every turn.
"Oh my gah, is that actuarial esimate based on mathematical law? You have alzheimer's or something. My gay brother smokes pot".
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
We are talking about gold in the world today. If a government passes a law that requires citizens to purchase gold every month or pay a tax penalty, is that action likely to make the price go up or down?
Until you answer my questions then I don’t know what the price of gold would be. The US isn’t the sole purchaser of gold. So your increase in demand if it coincides with a mass decrease because of the current trend in silver and other commodities, combined with low inflation and low risk of recession, likely means Gold is cheaper. If it’s combined with higher interest rates, low GDP growth, and potential recession then the price might skyrocket.
LMAO. It's like pulling teeth over here to get you to stay on track.
showa58taro wrote:You seem to have undermined your own argument.
You seem to be living on fantasy island.
Because I don’t rely on shit pretend scenarios and straw men? Yeah, that’s what is fantastical in this discussion.
Pretend? This is real life, sir. Why do countless insurance companies exist if you believe they are all based on the same estimates?
Literally never made that point once. See what I mean about straw men. You’re relying on defeating an argument I never made.
Your point is "Insurance premiums are based on risk and actuarial estimates".
Cool beans. Let's say 4 insurance companies exist. Will they all have the same price tag for John Doe's business, or will they compete with each other to get John Doe's business?
Are you somehow confusing actuarial estimates as a mathematical law or summat? Geez. Like trying to explain things to a dotard. Honestly, go read up on this stuff instead of trying to give these random hypotheticals that are irrelevant bro.
No, you began arguing about how the market operates, then went down the "read up on it, bro", "I never made that point once", "That's a straw man scenario" route. You can't answer a simple question without derailing yourself at every turn.
"Oh my gah, is that actuarial esimate based on mathematical law? You have alzheimer's or something. My gay brother smokes pot".
You're pulling a J-Mac, here.
Indeed. I did highlight that it’s not just a demand-led market like a consumable. And that pricing relies on actuarial estimates.
You then seemed to confuse that point with some kind of universal pricing structure. And away we ran.
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
We are talking about gold in the world today. If a government passes a law that requires citizens to purchase gold every month or pay a tax penalty, is that action likely to make the price go up or down?
Until you answer my questions then I don’t know what the price of gold would be. The US isn’t the sole purchaser of gold. So your increase in demand if it coincides with a mass decrease because of the current trend in silver and other commodities, combined with low inflation and low risk of recession, likely means Gold is cheaper. If it’s combined with higher interest rates, low GDP growth, and potential recession then the price might skyrocket.
Let me ask this in the simplest way possible. Is a mandate to purchase gold an upwards price influencer or a downwards price influencer. This means, all things being equal, is that single action likely to increase or decrease the price.
showa58taro wrote:Indeed. I did highlight that it’s not just a demand-led market like a consumable. And that pricing relies on actuarial estimates.
Ok. Great. We've gotten this far. Now let's pump the brakes here...
According to you insurance prices rely on actuarial esimates as opposed to market and demand. If that is the case, why do Obamacare premiums skyrocket to completely non-affordable heights year after year? Also, why do multiple insurance companies exist if the money is going to be the same, based on actuarial estimates?
Foo wrote:Seb, what would happen to the price of gold if a law was passed that you must buy gold every month or pay a tax penalty?
What’s the determinant here? Given that this is fictitious gold, are there fictitious mechanisms in place to avoid price inflation? Are there subsidies to purchase gold and rules how expensive gold is?
Or is it literally there’s only so much gold and suddenly everyone needs it? What’s the interest rates in the US and global market? Is it a recession or an economic boom? Is GDP increasing or decreasing? What is silver doing, or other commodities?
We are talking about gold in the world today. If a government passes a law that requires citizens to purchase gold every month or pay a tax penalty, is that action likely to make the price go up or down?
Until you answer my questions then I don’t know what the price of gold would be. The US isn’t the sole purchaser of gold. So your increase in demand if it coincides with a mass decrease because of the current trend in silver and other commodities, combined with low inflation and low risk of recession, likely means Gold is cheaper. If it’s combined with higher interest rates, low GDP growth, and potential recession then the price might skyrocket.
LMAO. It's like pulling teeth over here to get you to stay on track.
It seems to be hard to get you and Foo to try and stop oversimplification of complex ideas to try and fit into your scenario.
Everything above is a part of determining the price point of gold. Adding a hypothetical about buying more of it doesn’t change those principles. Just adds to one of a multitude of variables.
Which is actually a great great point to make about the Insurance debate. Could prices have gone up because of more demand and more consumers? Possible. Could it also have gone up because the “risk ceiling” increased under Trump as the indication was many cost recucing and risk reducing mechanisms would be repealed or not paid out? Possible also. Could premiums and prices increase due to the increased burden on the health system and the increased number of people affected by obesity, physical violence, and drug abuse? Also possible. Almost those are increasing in some areas for some reasons. Could prices go up because of increased life spans of the elderly due to technological advances? Possible. Could prices be increasing because of R&D costs for high-value drugs? Also possible.
Nothing is simple, but a few things become clear. Obamacare premiums increased and that is a problem but they are about to increase more now that fewer healthy people lower the risk pool and distribute costs. The refusal to renew common sense cost reduction mechanisms also increased premiums. That’s the truth here. The rest of your point is such an ancillary comment it is laughable.
