Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (423798)	10/8/2008 2:38:17 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571400

Insurance of things like homes is regulated because voters want the government to hold down insurance rates. But even regulated home insurers don't assets sufficient to cover all the insurance they have outstanding. What an idiot. Of course they don't have assets to cover 100% loss on all their policies. But they are one of the most severely regulated industries because they have to have reasonable reserves. Or they get shut down by the government. You want to get insurance from an unregulated insurance company that may or may not be able to pay your claim?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (423798)	10/8/2008 3:01:48 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571400

Yes and to cover one home for mortgage protection could wipe out tens, hundreds, or even thousands of policies. Just depends on how long they have to take over payments. Just one house payment would be equivilent to many months of insurance payments. IMO taxpayers probably should stay out of this. It's one thing to buy mortgages of houses that will someday be worth more than the mortgage, the government could even make a profit. Another to pick up failed insurance companies or to take over payments. Hard to regulate and more likely to cause the government debt to go over the tipping point. That would be about 50% or so.