Can it get any worse?
I thought the purpose of the PPACA was to get everyone in the country insured?
Why do they keep making exceptions for those with coverage, but the open enrolloment period for people without coverage ends 3/31?
Wouldn’t it make sense to keep the enrollment period open all year and defer any penalty for two years?
Maybe that’s too much common sense for the bureaucrats.
They are doing this because of the mid-term elections…trickery is the only thing this administration has ever been transparent about.
Says the person who wasn’t able to previously secure insurance due to cost, pre-x condition, or exhausted limits, “Yes, it can be worse. Go back to the way it was before.”
Pre existing conditions were covered in the republican plan. Obama didn’t make things more affordable, the cost is 18% higher than the projected republican plan.
Republicans also offered up to a $5k debit card for buying your own insurance on the exchange as well as made the insurance premiums deductible, if you were under a certain income range. But they are for the rich right Planet?
Obama by comparison made the amount higher for premiums for you to deduct insurance premiums for taxes. Increased the premiums, which will be paid for in higher taxes for all. Etc. It is not more affordable when you subsidize a product. You pay the taxes.
I should say, Obama made it so medical expenses had to be higher to deduct, which doesn’t technically include insurance, but also the cap on the max you can pay for insurance which technically is a deduction of insurance premiums past 9.5% or whichever range you fit into.
The republican plan would have given that same basic subsidy for your income range, but also would let you deduct insurance premiums.
It seems like that would build deficits. But with the premiums coming down it actually wouldn’t by comparison to the democrat’s plan. Some people would still choose to be uninsured. That is exactly why the plan had a lower number of people insured under it (which the democrats insulted it for). But is trying to have a set number insured, really the goal? No. It is to bring down costs, and offer a subsidized option for those who want it. Hypothetically more insureds would lower costs. But clearly, the republican plan was factually 18% cheaper, so it doesn’t work out that way.
From my perspective having a set number (every American) was exactly the goal. I think most people that voted for this political platform agree.
He has not met his set number. Not even sure if he has made the half way mark and open enrollment is closing.
What was the goal of the set number?
To lower costs.
Did it lower costs? No.
People should be able to choose to get into the pool or not to. Over time, maybe they would choose to get into the pool and it would go down further.
Forcing someone to get insurance, and raising the cost for everyone, doesn’t even begin to make sense.
What is the reason to have a higher number?
I was talking about a universal plan, Bob & FFA. Healthcare provided for each and every American.
I was talking about what was passed. Not what was not.
A public option (not solely public) would be fine to me. There’s a reason I’m fine with subsidized coverage, barring it having an affect on private costs or raising costs as a whole.
The system Obama set up is exactly the worst of all worlds.
The system from republicans would be universal. If you can’t afford coverage with a $5,000 debit card as well as the ability to deduct your premiums from taxes, your income range would fall low enough to be on medicare/medicaid.
That is universal coverage, while offering a private option. The best of all worlds. I don’t get why you won’t admit the republican plan was good.
If that’s the Republican plan in a nutshell, then it would be a better plan. Why didn’t they fight for it? Publicize it? Educate the public on it?
You’re the only person on here that has actually mentioned what the Republican plan was. The rest of us didn’t even know they had one. Shame on them.
Libby, you said it your self in a previous blog – I would have been less expensive to buy all uninsured people an HMO.
It was publicized. This is the reason I refuse to vote democrat currently and hate media.
The media made the fight solely about the supposed “number” of uninsured, and then made the famous commercials of Paul Ryan pushing a granny off a cliff.
They fought based on the number of supposed insureds by the plan. It’s similar to what you and me just debated on. It is just no one would trust the republicans saying what I just said. They refused to.
I wouldn’t have trusted Mitt Romney, but I would have trusted John McCain. I swear to you, I never heard word one about a Republican health care plan. They have been adamently against it since the Clinton administration (blocking Hillarycare) and for 8 years Bush did nothing about it. So, yeah, the trust level is probably lacking there.
As I ask all democrats, and so called independents (because I don’t believe most are)
The words were out there.
The question is why didn’t you see them?
The answer that you are telling yourself is that the republicans didn’t want you to see. That’s you lying to yourself because of the extreme bias against republicans in this country, even with independents.
The answer is easy. The media did a damn good job at changing what you focused on, and hiding what the republicans wanted.
As I said, this plan was something you heard about. You just didn’t hear all the details, because it got turned into a partisan debate about the numbers of insured in the republican vs the democrat plan. Every news article agency out there did the comparison on the numbers of uninsured. They were sure to phrase it in a way to make you remember the uninsured numbers, not the $5k debit card and ability to deduct your insurance premiums.
Now are you afraid of the democrat power in this country? Or are you going to keep saying the republicans are just bad at getting it across?
I heard about it. I saw it. It’s because I don’t buy into the little wars that are constantly going on.
By the way: You are right. Since Clinton the democrats have done quite a good job of crying wolf and trying to make the republican’s wants not go heard.
We haven’t passed a single republican plan, you haven’t even heard about good republican plans, and what do you hear about Libby?
About how the republicans are so good at blocking ‘dem dere democrat ideas, and don’t have any of your own.
Does that not scare you at all? We are passing garbage plans while the democrats say how they didn’t get what they want, and they are hiding what you should be seeing and what you do want. These players need to be removed from the field as hardcore as the republicans were in the depression. There’s a reason the republicans have these good ideas: They have been held to godly standards for a long time.
Ditch the democrats for 20 years. They need to be broken back into line.
We also talked about the retirement plans of Bush in the past.
The ones that would make a 401k plan that you could invest $5,000 in to, only if your income was under $80k, and it would give the same tax credit we give to the poor for investing. Bush W’s investment plans were second to none for retirement for the middle class.
As usual, no one heard about them. Why? It benefited the “rich” too much. $5k of investments per year tax free with a tax credit benefits the rich too much? Then it got forgotten about.
Republicans are constantly being forced to pass supposed “middle ground” policies. As agent calls them “rhinos”. In some ways, agent is very smart conceptually. Mathematically he messes up. Get the big picture and you’ll see why we need to stop this trend of bashing republicans. We need new plans. New ideals. It is not the republicans that have been stone walling. They have offered all the major plans to modify retirement, (see above) healthcare (5k debit card etc above) medicare (vouchers and public. More options not less). Health care, Medicare, Social Security, those are three issues I have shown you how they win out. Move on to taxes, incentivizing people to hire here, corporate tax rates, etc.
Each area they are better on, and it turns into an ideological rich vs poor war. With the democrats saying republicans are killing the elderly, (not an overstatement. This was literally their commentary) are helping the rich (in regards to a $5k investment plan? Seriously? A bit over the top) are ruining retirement, etc. Don’t listen to these mother %@#@#ers. You know better. I can see it.
Bob – I’m sorry, but I don’t believe there was some media conspiracy to block Republican plans. If they had a great plan, they should have shouted it from the rooftops. They didn’t.
You said: “The question is why didn’t you see them?
The answer that you are telling yourself is that the republicans didn’t want you to see…”
No, I’m not. I’m saying either they didn’t really have such a great plan, or they scrambled at the last minute to come up with a plan so they didn’t get caught with their pants down, or they really didn’t believe in their plan. There is no other way they should not have been campaigning through the streets with their health care plan. They didn’t think Americans really cared about it and they erred fatally.
Of all people, you’d think Romney would have been talking about their plan considering what he did in MA. He didn’t. He talked about some 5 pronged plan that had no substance or detail in it. Ryan at least had a comprehensive plan, but unfortunately it did not agree with Romney’s.
I’m not automatically against a plan just because it happens to be a Republican idea. Where are they now with this supposed awesome plan they came up with 5 years ago? Not one peep from them about it. Now, what’s up with that???
No conspiracy, just “good” politics.
The republican channels did report on this. You consciously chose not to watch Fox and Forbes around the time. This is why I tell you and Planet that you need to stop ignoring these stations.
The plans were talked about. You’re wrong on it. Through and through. If it wasn’t talked about how did I see it? How did I see the CBO reports?
You saw them too, but again, liberal stations focused on the number of uninsured difference.
They did campaign down the streets. Paul Ryan even was on CNN. He had to literally tell the lady she was being dishonest about it. Boehner was singing it down the halls. And Obama kept on saying they didn’t have one plan. That’s what the media kept on saying. Obama said you have to sit in the back. That’s what the media and democrats kept saying.
How could they simultaneously have no ideas, and have to sit in the back? Does this really go this far over your head? Did you miss it play out?
They and you out right denied the republican plans. And Libby: You and I have actually debated about this plan before, you are selectively blocking it out each time. I simply cannot believe how many times I have re-informed you about this plan. It is because of your bias against republicans. I told you as it was happening. I showed you the Forbes link. I know for certain I did. Then you went on about the number of uninsured difference. I said it was irrelevant.
Worth some personal reflection on your part:
Why is it that you don’t believe in indoctrination and manipulation in public issues unless it is a republican, or a big business, or a CEO?
This is part of your blindside. If a republican thinks it, we have conspiracy theory, if a democrat does…It’s just normal?
You have a huge bias, that goes beyond just numbers like me. I have bias and numbers. You just give the democrats a free pass, and ignore their level of corruption.
We have deals like the DHT deal in Oregon. Democrats literally passed laws to kick them out of the state. We have the Ohio senator with the flight regulations against UPS. He said no state could contact him about it since he was representing the Ohio State on the matter…About FEDERAL flight regulations.
Green energy preference, etc etc. Yet all the while supposedly republicans are for big CEO’s? They are for equal tax rates for big oil, and that makes them “FOR” big oil? Giving big oil equal tax rates to a standard manufacturing company is subsidizing big oil? World wide revenues compared to world wide tax rates, oil companies pay about 44%. World wide revenues to US Tax rate they pay closer to 16%. Why not lower our rate so they pay 25% here, and have no incentive to have world wide revenues? US revenues in place? And the democrats focus on that 16% rate as in that’s a reason to charge them more, while giving their buddies low rates at green energy.
How in the world does this go over your head?
You can’t list things like this on the right. It’s a circus story. They need to be tossed out. And they do have the edge on all of these.
Bob – I admitted you were the only one on here that has mentioned this plan. We have talked about it before, but you’re the only one.
Again, where is this great plan now? Why aren’t the Republicans making a case for revising the ACA to conform to their ideas instead of trying to repeal it?
They know repeal is impossible while Obama is in office, yet they continue to vote on it. If there is a great plan out there, they should be getting it out in front of the American people so that we can make those decisions come election day.
I still haven’t heard a peep.
And as far as Bush’s retirement plans, if I remember correctly this was going to replace SSI and make people’s retirement subject to the whims of the stock market. We all saw how well that worked out for our 401k’s and IRA’s in 2008. That’s all I remember about it. Was the $5k an annual thing or was it a one-time deal?
Bush W was going to do a multitude of private plans but was not going to remove public.
Also: The removal of the public would be a good plan, provided that you set up a second fund in the event that the market was down. This has been the republican plan for some time, but Bush W was not on board.
I’m the only person you’ve heard debate on it, which again, consider numbers. Why? Democrats are good with “politics”. I do admit most conservatives I have met are indeed stupid on their own politics. They are more focused on your positions than their own. This is not the case for republican politicians, and republican media. You are intermixing republican idiots, with republican politicians and policy.
The republicans are selling their plans, and they keep voting on them. Why else would they do the vote? You’re not making sense. They can’t be refusing to get the word out there considering how much they have been saying Obama’s plan is terrible and have been saying they have alternate options. The only people who say they don’t have options are democrat media, and Obama, who always say where are the options? The options are out there. They can’t make democrats and liberal stations report on it.
I apologize I’m tired again today I glossed over your other question:
$5k per year. It was a combo of a roth and a 401k. Basically the money put in was not only tax deductible (not taxed as income in) for lower income people it would give a substantial tax credit ($1,200 is a lot for someone making $30k or under) and would not be taxed as income at withdrawal.
So if you invested $2,400, next year you would get $1,200 back, you could start cycling 1/4th of the $5,000 into the account just from the tax credit alone. Which would mean $3,800 would come from you. $5,000 a year would be incredibly good after 30 years. I believe the math I did before was an average of 8% for $3,500 roughly was 1.6 million at retirement.
Also: 401k and IRA’s mainly do bad because people don’t invest enough. The 2008 crash does more to solidify why we should have these plans than say why we shouldn’t. Stock market is back up. We still have average 9% since the great depression (even including the great depression the 80’s crash, the 90’s bubble pop, and the great recession. These are no small amount of recessions, it’s been just over 1 every decade, but not quite 2) per year increase. The crashes would have an affect certainly, at the time of the crash, but then we could always print out cash and pay a social “security” net for that, which would finally make the word “security” and “net” make sense.
There is no need to fear a crash on this one.
I thought you might like this, recently in an article I got ticked when you said if a company cannot be profitable despite taxes it shouldn’t exist.
This company paid an effective 35% tax rate, so note that profit ratios would follow suit for all companies paying 35%. I told you that while 35% is 35% of revenues, when you factor in costs, this rate being lowered to say 15% would actually likely more than double the amount a company makes.
Note that on every gallon of gas they made 5.5 cents. The government made 60-70 cents. Take that in for a moment Libby. You believe a company shouldn’t exist if they can’t make 5.5 cents for every 60-70 the government makes. They paid more in taxes in the U.S. than they had profit. Their world wide revenues is the only reason they managed the 5.5 cent profit for the company. This also limits them from having extra capital to invest into jobs. The government taxing and then putting money to green energy companies, ensures that all the top companies will fail eventually, from lack of an ability to invest and or change.
Then we have the tax rates and affects on gas cost in the U.S.
70 cents a gallon. That’s insane. Democrats are not only encouraging this, they want to stop “subsidizing” oil. Subsidizing? Oil companies have been trying to get tax rates that manufacturing companies have. I suppose the manufacturing companies shouldn’t be manufacturing if they can’t provide the government 60 cents for every 5.5 they earn eh Libby?
This is why we are going down hill.
Interesting article, Bob, but you know as well as I do that numbers can be manipulated. If Exxon truly pays more taxes than they make in profit, they are doomed to failure. Something doesn’t sound kosher with the simplistic overview they provided. There’s more to the story than meets the eye.
If that were a liberal article you would listen to it, but again, it’s conservative so you question it. Conspiracy theory is coming full circle now isn’t it?
The numbers do add up. And they are all there. Worldwide revenues keep U.S companies afloat. This is why we are losing companies to other countries and jobs are going over seas. They can avoid the 35% tax rate that is bankrupting their company.
Still want that corporate tax rate high, and for corporations to pay more Libby?
Further to the point: If something is fishy then good. It’s keeping Exxon Mobil afloat, because if the government got them all the way, you’re right, they would go bankrupt.
It still proves the point that corporate tax rates are far too high.
Also, that the tax rates are increasing the cost of gas by almost 20% That money would do best as capital and in the form of jobs. When you lower the corporate tax rate, and get more jobs, you get more income tax revenue. This is really common sense, and it’s why Canada has consistently had better deficits than us despite having a 15% corporate rate, and consistently since they put this rate in place had jobs increase, their dollar value increase, and is now equal to ours and are faring better in the recession.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding the report, but is Exxon counting the tax that’s passed on to consumers at the pump as part of the taxes Exxon paid?
It has nothing to do with it being a conservative source. It was Exxon’s own publication, not the media’s.
I have never argued for high or higher corporate tax rates, yet you think I do. What I argue for is an end to the loopholes available to circumvent paying taxes.
Why would Exxon do any business in the U.S. if they are paying more in tax than they are in profit? It appears they are using loopholes, shelters, or whatever other means are available to them to skew the numbers.
If it doesn’t make sense, it doesn’t make sense. And this doesn’t pass the smell test.
It passes the test, when you consider PR.
As for the loopholes: That has been your point all along, that they avoid taxes. The implication is that they aren’t paying enough.
We don’t need to make them pay more or do away with loop holes. We need to lower the rates, make reason to bring revenues here, and allow companies to create capital.
Do you think businesses should pay no taxes? Because that just flies in the face of fairness to me. I think everyone that benefits from society ought to equally contribute to society.
Do I think a business should pay a tax separately from the CEO?
NO. Why should it? The business employs 100’s or thousands of people.
You want to go after the rich, target their income through marginal rates. There is absolutely no reason to go after business income separately, or business profit. That profit is shared or reinvested. Grab it when he takes it or claims it as income. Not the business which provides for all of us, and accordingly takes from all of us. Plus grabbing it direct doesn’t increase the cost of doing business nearly as much. Tax all the wealthy 1% in a higher marginal rate, and they can raise costs enough to increase their income. Tax the whole corporation (including revenues for you) and they now have to pay more to employ not just themselves, but you as well! Think about it Libby!
I think you’re being dishonest with yourself when it comes to how you think of tax rates.
Business tax rates should not be separate from income.
that should read and now they have to *charge more*
To pay for you. It increases the cost of you being employed. Especially when we have them bringing in 5.5 cents for every 60.
It also decreases the amount they can invest to bring in more jobs.
It’s ignorant to have a corporate tax. Every country that dropped it to 10-15% has had higher income tax revenues. While liberals always focus on their lower corporate tax revenues (duh, lower rates) the higher income tax revenues are from more employees, and more revenues as a result. It benefits everyone.
Dissect it in a simple manner:
If you want to make sure the rich don’t get away with money, why don’t you go after their money.
How is it unfair for a business to have more money, in the event that we tax the CEO fairly in a marginal rate?
Businesses can avoid tax, but the CEO cannot when he claims that business revenue as income.
So who is left in the business that you want to tax Libby? That’s the question to ask. Who do you want to tax so badly that doesn’t fall into high marginal rates? Because if you tax the business more that’s who you’re going after. There are no if’s and’s or butts about it.
You’ve made some interesting points, Bob. I’m going to give it some serious thought and do some research so I can better respond.
I’m so sorry I missed your comment!
No. They are counting what people pay for buying gas taxes to say how much Exxon is taxed.
They have that number there to show that the government is making more off a gallon of gas than they are (after expenses, taxes, and paying their employees).
Of course, some of those employees are being paid a lot, but those employees who are being paid a lot, I can guarantee you they are now at a higher rate than 35% on income than the business which will be at 35%. My argument is to go after that big CEO guy through the income tax, and leave the rest to the business. Make it easy for them to make money, and they could either charge less, have more to invest, or employ more. If they take more personally for income, then it will be taxed as income and you get it anyway. It’s win win win making it charged as income tax only.
Thanks, bob! I just figured no one noticed my little post. It’s been a rough week all around, I think.
Cap, you keep ignoring the fact that coverage was available to them.
Not everyone and not always affordable.
Then Subsidize them people, not the whole country. Cut foreign aid to pay for it.
I don’t disagree FFA. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Take our tax money and quit using it for foreign aid and being the world’s police and use it to benefit the people that live here. Universal healthcare would be an awesome step, then end hunger, then jobs, jobs, and more jobs.
Its a good list. I would start with Jobs so people can afford to eat, pay for their health care then more jobs so people can save for retirement.
Well, you have to be healthy in order to work and I know I can’t focus without a full belly, so I’ll stick with my order.
Maybe it could be worse, but you have to admit that the changes being made are fubar-ing everything. How can anyone know what is really the rule if they keep getting changed? The piecemeal alterations to this law can only make matters more difficult.
At this point, I can see no logic for keeping the law. It’s not going to work. It was bad to begin with, but now it’s total poo.
So sad to see such our weak President continue to play politics with our healthcare system. If it is not good enough for us now, why should we wait to get it later? Pathetic!
Planet I really do not know anyone who has had many issues of getting coverage or having their 1,000,000 annual limits exhausted, or a problem with telling your kids when they are out of school to buy their own policies. I do however know a great deal of people who do not wish to pay for some idiot’s health insurance who will not get a job in 99 weeks, I also know a lot of people who do not wish to pay a fine and 70% rate increase for their health insurance.
I will take what I had, thank you!
Just laid off at 60 years old after 38 contineous years of insurance employment. Pre-existing conditions – yes. Thank-you President Obama for the Affordable Car Act! Thank-you! Thank-you! Thank-you!
Now get a job to pay for it! I do not wish to pay for yours!
Why would you assume he’s NOT paying for it?
He lost his job! duh!
Duh. That doesn’t mean he’s not paying his premium. I was laid off and continued to pay ALL of my bills, you ninny.
Pre existing conditions was a part of the republican plan, and it wouldn’t have caused deficits, which you have to pay through taxes, and it wouldn’t have caused premium increases, which while you get a subsidy for it, you then have to pay in taxes.
The republican plan was 18% cheaper than Obama’s as rated by the CBO and covered pre existing conditions. So….No thank you Obama! No Thank you no thank you no thank you!
idk, thank you for your 38 years of service to our industry. I think you’ve earned your healthcare coverage. I’m sure there are many more in a similar situation.
If it is so good, why does Obama now wish to delay it? Facts please!
Why do we continue to pay for insurance for our Politicians? Why dont they go to the Great Exchange and pay their own way?
They do have to go to the exchange for coverage, FFA. They just obtain a government subsidy as part of their compensation package. So, in essence, we’re paying for it but it’s coming from the exchange.
He’s giving in to pressure. However, if he had stuck to his intent and not been willing to budge, wouldn’t you then be criticizing him for that?
I agree – if this law is so good, and would be beneficial to so many people, why do they keep delaying it until “after the next election?” Implement it fully, let people see how wonderful it is, and the Democrats would be swept back into office in a tidal wave of gratitude from the American people for having helped all of us by giving us this law. How can we tell we’ll love it if it’s never allowed to go into effect? And then all the naysayers who have been predicting gloom and doom would have egg on their faces and would have to slink away with their tails between their legs, utterly humiliated at having opposed such a wonderful, beneficial law. Now of course, as a conservative, I don’t WANT this thing to go into effect because the more entrenched it becomes, the harder it will be to get rid of it and the damage it will do and is already doing. But the question persists – if it’s so great, why are the Democrats running scared from it and the President, whose “signature accomplishment” it’s said to be, keeps delaying it?
Who are here is saying it is so good?
The President is saying it’s so good – he was just talking yesterday about how many people will benefit from it. The Democrats who passed it have been saying for years how wonderful it was going to be for all of us. Ezekiel Emanuel keeps telling us how much more we’re going to like the new policies than the “substandard” ones we had before. And yet, the very ones who passed it and kept telling us how much benefit it was going to be to us, are now the ones who keep postponing the full implementation of it, over and over. So again, the question is, to the President and to the Democrats in Congress – if this law is so great, why not just implement it NOW and let us all SEE how great it is? Why the constant delays? What are you all afraid of there at the White House and the Capitol?
Well said. And, a very good point.
#1 = Fear of change (highly influenced by media & a certain political party)
Policies that have less coverage (don’t comply with ACA requirements) and may be cheaper
Fear of Voters kicking their A*s out of office! Policies that have less coverage may be what I want to buy! and yes that comes with a lower premium. When you sell your client an umbrella they want higher limits and higher premiums. When you sell 50/100 liability limits instead of 500/500 it cost less. Get it! its call the free market and freedom to choose. Yikes! It really is not hard to see through this move! Politics! Its like all libtards and a community organizer way over his head and unable to deal with reality. ITS NOT GOING TO WORK WELL POLITICALLY AND FUNCTIONALLY FOR DEMOCRATS IN NOV IF THEY DO NOT DELAY THIS! AND THEY KNOW IT!
Sarah – Sounds like you must be hiring. Sign me up!
Idk, You just made another great observation! Why would anyone hire you if they know they will have to pay a fine and higher premiums.
WTF are you talking about?
Obviously Libby you are not an employer and researched the law. Any employer of 50 or more is required to pay a fine if any of their employees or their dependents obtain coverage with a subsity the employer loses their QHP and pays a fine of $2,000 per employee over the limit of 35 employees. Also the higher premiums are just a known fact that is happening right now at every employers renewals. Ours went up 45% last month. I know its hard for liberals to understand, but employers will not add to their already burdensome health insurance premiums by adding additional workers.
Why do you assume he’s getting a subsidy? Sounds like a lot of ass-u-me.
Libby, He lost his job and has no income other than what we pay him with unemployment.
How do you know what income he has available? Savings, SSI, Disability, pension, IRA. He’s already told you he does not qualify for a subsidy, so you really need to drop your whole “I don’t want to pay for you” schtick. It’s really getting old anyhow.
Libby how about the other 4 million getting their subsidy? I do not want to pay for them either!
I know, Sarah. You are only concerned with yourself.
Why does Obama keep delaying this law? POLITICS! He knows it is terrible for the middle class tax payers and employers. He like all socialist, is about buying votes.. This time it backfired because the law is awful and penalizes anyone with a decent income and hurts those that want to work full time with good pay. So if your employer has to pay higher taxes, fines and health insurance, Where do you think your raise will come from? Huh?
It is good to see you back Sarah. You do realize that being an agency owner is a no no to Libby. She will insult us agency owners at every opportunity. God forbid a Conservative offer a valid point. We are just looking out for ourselves, right?
Sarah, in response to your 1:51 PM response: So you’re now saying that if idk gets a job, he’s doing a bad thing? Earlier you said he should get a job to get healthcare coverage; now you’re saying he should not?
Don’t call me….., My point was he is now at a disadvantage due to Obamacare. He should absolutely get another job but make sure that he cancels his subsidized ACA plan or his employer could be subject to a $2,000 per employee fine. He should get a job or better yet create one by starting his own business and live the american dream and provide for others instead of sucking off society as libtards do.
So you’re that unless you’re a business owner you’re sucking off society? Do all of your employees know what you think of them?
That is well and good if the insurance company is willing to continue plan when they were forced pay for R&D and tech. to update to new mandates.
Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of NJ was not willing to extend old policy forcing us into a age based group rate. Rates went up anywhere double for a family of 4, to triple for a 63yr old employee. How is this far,? Agency can not afford double the premium it paid last yr. with all the companies cutting commissions…1st time in 23 yrs office will not be offering health insurance for employees. Problem is if we add health contribution back into pay, we get screwed on additional payroll taxes.
Its cheaper for most to take the tax credit and pay direct, plus I am making sure those employees who qualify go on the CHIP program for their kids…Time to play the system…
I am so tired working harder, making less yet paying more in taxes….
But Kam, its affordable. oBama said so, so it must be.
If this plan is so great, why does it (illegally) get delayed again and again? Oh yeah, two big elections coming up in 2014 and 2016 where the Democrats don’t wnat the public to know the $#@% that has been foisted upon them before they vote.
Dave- Exactly, The way it looks to me is that there are more uninsured today than when Obama started. How is that. Well, 6.5 million insured Americans lost their insurance. Approximately 3.5 million have “signed up” for obamacare. Part of that number are those who lost their insurance (In the 6.5 mill pot) and part of the 3.5 million have signed up but not paid (The Obamacare statisticians are counting those who select a plan but not paid). So you really need to take them out of the 3.5 Million sign ups because it is not a net gain. Take all that together and more uninsured with Obamacare than without Obamacare. Add that to those who actually signed up and paid (The adverse select)and medicaid and it looks like a bust to me.
The delays are nothing more than playing the system to save the Senate during the mid term election. That is also an expense
Sargeant, good to see you back commenting on the forum. I have missed your pithy comments and FFA & I mostly have had to carry the water for the Conservative cause. I hope everything has been going well for you. I know the weather has been bad up their in your neck of the woods. Keep the comments coming.
Yes, the weather has been trough. I think we are closing in (or may have passed) 90 inches of snow and we are supposed to get some more this weekend. So 7 and 1/2 ft and still rising. Very cold as we’ll. I have been pretty busy as we’ll. was back in Texas a couple weeks ago and think we have wrapped that deal up. The weather was perfect. We were only there 3 days but it was a nice break.
I am sure you, FFA, Bob, Sarah and the gang held your own. You sure had plenty of Obama folly to help you like: his outrageous budget with 1trillion dollar tax hike (I thought he wasn’t going to tax the middle), his Ukrainian fiasco, another Obamacareless delay, the website shutdown again this week, the lousy number of Obamacareless BUYERS,
The best one this last week or so, I thought was his desire to shrink the military to levels pre WW2. At that time our military ranked 17th in the world in size. So he makes the proposal and Russia invades The Ukraine, not to mention North Korea, Syria (which he helped start), Libya, Iran, not to mention China. This guy is an idiot.
I agree there is some idiocy going on with this President both domestically and internationally, weaken the military, spending the country into bankruptcy, but I also think this is by design to bring this country down by employing the Cloward & Pivin plan. Socialism has never worked in this world as an economic model.
People on this forum like Libby, Ron, Planet, Boogereater, Ins102, Shirley actually voted for this guy twice and they expect us to respect their opinion. What a joke. By the way, in the Texas primaries on Tuesday, they had a referendum vote on the ballot to either repeal Obamacare or not. Over 1.1 million ballots to repeal and 7,700 to keep this disaster. Texas has spoken. Too bad we can’t have a national referendum vote up or down by the people. Congress would have to do the will of the people or be ousted from office. This stinker has got to go.
I NEVER expected you to respect my opinion, just respect the facts. If you believe the data I provide is wrong then do some research, provide your facts, and cite your source.
Until then, you are just another lemming of the right.
You have rarely, if ever, provided good methodology, especially on debt in which I have seen you numerous times try to compare Bush’s last year percentage increase, to Obama’s following percentage increases. That has definitely been the one that shows your level of indoctrination the most.
Agent is no more indoctrinated than you are
Sarah – I was just laid off. I still have insurance now. When I apply for ACA it’s income based…and I had a good chunk of income this year – so no subsidy. So still paying for my own insurance. Assumptions are no good – duh!
Idk, The assumption was if you were just laid off, you are not receiving any income and do not projected income for the forseeable future. The only exception is Unemployment compensation benefits are taxable income for federal income taxes, although states usually exempt unemployment benefits from state income taxes.I would think you can apply for subsidized coverage this year unless you are sucking so much money out of unemployment system that you do not qualify.
idk, Make sure if you apply for a job with an employer who has more than 50 that you cancel your ACA subsidized policy before working for them as they will have to pay the $2000 fine per employee for every employee over the 35 number of employees. example
80 employees -35 = 45 X $2000 = $90,000 fine for having an just one employee obtaining a subsidy from the ACA. That is why any employer close to the magic #50 employees will not be hiring and will be limiting all employees they can to less than 30 hours a week.
There you go assuming again. You know what they say about assuming, don’t you?
Libby, this is not opinion, this is facts. I know you had to pass the law to find out whats in it. But there is a $2,000 fine for every employee over the 35 employee limit for employers with more than 50 employees.
Now that it is passed you might want to read it!
You might want to re-read it, Sarah. It’s $2,000 for every employee over 35 or $3,000 for each subsidized employee, whichever is less. And it does not apply if you have offered affordable healthcare.
So this is what the Republicants do. They hide your comments when you present FACTS they don’t like, that don’t fit into their fanatical propaganda and agenda.
So, I’ll post it again for your low-information voters.
“You might want to re-read it, Sarah. It’s $2,000 for every employee over 35 or $3,000 for each subsidized employee, whichever is less. And it does not apply if you have offered affordable healthcare.”
You might learn something. But then again, probably not.
blah blah blah, Facts instead of ridicule Libby!
You want facts, Sarah? Uh, I think I gave them to you several times on this very post.
THERE IS NO FINE IF THE EMPLOYER OFFERS AFFORDABLE COVERAGE. Is that any clearer for you?
If affordable coverage is offered, the employee IS NOT eligible for a subsidy.
Sarah, did you even read what idk wrote?
What part of “so no subsidy. So still paying for my own insurance” don’t you understand?
idk, its based on what you expect to earn in 2014, nothing to do with taxes from 2013. If you dont expect to find a job, your MAGI starts at ). Add in investment income and the other things Libby listed above and you get your MAGI.
In the current job market, I wish you the best at finding another job.
I agree with you FFA, do wish him well and hope he finds a job.
Not out of the goodness of your heart, but only so you don’t have to pay for his health insurance. You’ve already shown your true colors, Sarah.
But FFA, idk specifically said he (she?) is paying for health insurance. I don’t think you can get the subsidy up front if your 2013 income doesn’t qualify.
Subsidy is based on the year you are taking it – not last year.
You can take it immediately even if you didn’t qualify the previous year? Huh. Not sure that’s a good idea, either.
She’s actually doing hypothetical scenarios.
While Sarah has not made sense in all these posts, think about what she just pointed out when it comes to the problems with the law.
What if someone subsidizes insurance and then prefers it over getting insurance at work at their next job? Work can’t make them take their plan. It could actually charge them to hire the person.
Sarah actually has a potential good point, but I would have to research it to find out if it is accurate and how it works in the system, as I’m just pointing out what she said.
Her assumptions, so far, have all been wrong – as is her statement.
If a full-time employee is offered health insurance from their employer, they cannot get a policy with a subsidy on the exchange.
The fine is only for employers that do not offer affordable coverage (less than 9.5% of income.) And the fine is $3,000 for each subsidized employee or $2,000 for every employee after the first 30 – whichever is lesser.
See, Sarah, your assumption that I did not research the law is also incorrect.
Libby, if you remember what I told Idk, I had told him if he finds work with an employer who offer him insurance, he must cancel his policy. If he does not his employer will face this fine. I was not making an assumption, it is a fact!
And if an employee already has said coverage? Do they have to get rid of the plan?
We aren’t talking about getting a job then taking the subsidy coverage. We are talking about having the subsidy coverage then getting a job.
He can keep the coverage, but not the subsidy. If your employer offers affordable health coverage, you are not entitled to a subsidy.
And then does the new employer pay for the coverage he had? Or do they get to change it? I think you’re missing the point.
And if they don’t have to pay for it, since it’s from the exchange, does it count as a policy they should have paid for? Will they be fined? Will they be forced to pay for the extension of a policy that someone chose before working with them?
Your answer is far too simple and is not answering the question.
It also applies to dependents claimed on their tax return. A child moves out and goes to school. Some libtard Navigator sells the kid a fully subsidized plan without telling their parents employer. Opps! Here comes the fine!
If your employer offers affordable health coverage, they are exempt from any fines. The employee can choose to buy his coverage through his employer (usually cheaper and better) or through the exchange. If they purchase through the exchange, they are not eligible for any subsidy, though.
Here’s how it works:
Offer no coverage – $2k fine for every employee over 30 (whether they get subsidies or not.)
Offer coverage that is not deemed affordable (employees portion is more than 9.5% of average company wages) – $3k fine for every employee that gets a subsidy through the exchange.
Offer affordable coverage – no fines
Again, Sarah – you don’t know what you’re talking about. Fines only apply to EMPLOYEES receiving a subsidy – not dependents.
Really, you are embarrassing yourself here.
We are talking in circles. You’re missing the key points.
The employer is required to offer coverage. You also said that if the employee rejects the coverage and goes to the exchanges it fines the employer, or perhaps Sarah said it. This is getting too convoluted.
So if the employer offers coverage after the employee already has insurance on the exchange, and the insured rejects, is the company fined? Alternatively, since he’s opting for the exchange and losing his subsidy, doesn’t this mean he’s being forced to get the employer’s coverage? And wasn’t that the point of what Sarah said? That either he loses his subsidy, or he chooses to go with other insurance for some reason and the employer is fined?
Bob, I don’t know how I can make it any simpler. All the employer has to do to avoid being fined is offer affordable coverage. The employee is not required to buy their coverage from their employers plan, they can go to the exchange if they prefer. If they do to the exchange, they won’t qualify for a subsidy because their employer has offered affordable coverage.
So if he buys an exchange policy (with or without a subsidy) and he gets a job, he can either keep his exchange policy or go through his employer’s coverage. If he got a subsidy with the exchange policy, then yes, he is no longer eligible for that subsidy and it must end. But the employer, in either case, is not subject to a fine because they offered affordable coverage.
Here’s a link that might help:
Ok, so then the word “offer” is not the same as “provide”.
I hear some people say they have to “provide”. I thought when you said “offer” this was the same phrasing.
I get what you’re saying now.
In an effort to not be such an annoying jerk:
There are of course many aspects of this law that I don’t understand. It’s quite complicated.
I appreciate your explanations on it. You did them well even if I wasn’t getting it at first. I won’t pretend to know the entire law, I do know what I don’t like.
So taking in what you do like, or what does work, is in fact useful.
Thanks for that, Bab. It seems many people on here want to argue with the messenger instead of the message. I try to explain the law (which they are against, but don’t understand) and I get censored.
I didn’t make the law, people. I’m just trying to set the record straight. If you’re going to argue against something at least know what you’re talking about.
I have said I don’t think the ACA is the best legislation; however, it is all we have right now so let’s fix it instead of bitching about it and trying to repeal it. What we had before was not working. Why would you go back FROM something not working TO something that’s not working? It doesn’t make sense. Let’s fix it and move on.
Apparantly the Republicans HAD a good plan at one point but they have been overcome by amnesia now and can’t remember it…
I was actually wrong. It is worse the number of the first 30 are exempt from the fine instead of 35. Here is another example of the law that we had to pass to find out what was in it.
Penalties For Failure To Insure
For firms which do not offer insurance any insurance, have more than 50 employees, and have at least one employee receiving insurance subsidies, they must pay a tax of $2000 per subsidized employee. The tax is applied to all of a firm’s employees (after excluding the first 30), not just those that are subsidized. For example a firm with 51 employees would pay $42,000 in new annual taxes, and an additional $2,000 tax for every new hire.
Its past. And yet, no one seems to know for sure whats in it because he keeps changing it.
Mid Terms cant get here soon enough. Thanks for all your years of service my Durbin. Time to get fired and get on oBama Care yur self. Let us know how you like it. May want to start the process now.
FFA, are we having fun yet? Tell me if you know. Libby is trying to tell everyone again how smart she is and few are buying it. By the way, on the Texas primaries yesterday, on the ballot was a Repeal Obamacare voting option, yes to repeal and no don’t repeal. The vote count was 1.1 million to repeal, only 7,700 not to repeal. Hmm! I guess at least Texas made their wishes known. I don’t know if other states hosting primaries did anything similar.
While I was in Texas I watched the local news and Wendy Davis was interviewed. What a nitwit. I hope the good people of Texas don’t buy her story. The reporters did speculate that she has told Obama and Biden not to come anywhere near Texas and please don’t campaign for her. LOL, now his own party is distancing themselves to try to get re elected.
By the way, the latest Obama approval polls, as of this evening is 38% approve of him and 54% disapprove . That is Jimmy Carter territory. LOL
Is this is a good time to bring up the fact that President Reagan had an approval rating of 35% in January 1983? And he is my favorite president during my lifetime.
Also, President Carter’s lowest approval rating was 28%. That is still better than the lowest ratings for Presidents Nixon (24%) or W. Bush (25%).
No commentary, just facts.
They don’t like facts, Ron. Facts get in the way of their talking points. If you point them out, they say you are just trying to show how smart you are. I say I’m just trying to show how dumb you are. LOL!
So Mr. Facts Ron, you said Reagan’s approval was lowest in January 83. What you failed to mention was that he was trying to recover the country from the Jimmy Carter disaster and it took a couple of years for his economic plans to kick in and produce results. How about furnishing his approval numbers after the nation rebounded. There was a good reason why Carter was a one termer by the way.
Can you dispute the facts? If not, then SHUT UP!!!
If you had a competent level of reading comprehension you would have noticed that I stated, “No commentary, just facts”.
Sargeant, you were right about Wendy Davis. She is nothing but a trailer trash liberal who is not gaining traction in this state. Her vote total in her primary was less than half of Abbott’s in his primary. Every poll has her trailing in double digits and going further south. People here don’t like these liberal idiots. I look for another blow out like Perry gave White in the last election. Perhaps poor Wendy will move to Pennsylvania and then Libby can vote for her.
oooohh!!! Careful, Agent!! You’re backing the lib Ron into a corner and we all know that libs don’t like that!! I could tell by his ‘SHUT UP’ comment. And, I thought the libs were the tolerant ones!! LMAO!!!!
Tolerance only goes so far when constantly confronted with stupidity.
Trust me I am not a liberal,
Way to continue to perpetuate the right point of view. You have no facts to dispute mine, so you go to ridicule.
Agent constantly makes statements that should be supported by data, but never provides said data. When I provide actual data that disproves his position, he discredits the source. He NEVER provides data that counters mine. That is what I am intolerant about.
Finally, as i mentioned to Agent many times, I AM NOT A LIBERAL, I AM AN INDEPENDENT.
Oh, shut up, Libby.
I still don’t like you, Ron. You are the most obnoxious, LEFT leaning INDEPENDENT that I’ve ever had the displeasure of blogging with.
Of course you don’t like me. All I do is provide facts and data that go against your narrative. Most righties I have met find facts obnoxious. It kills their whole argument.
BTW, I like you.
I would venture to say the feeling is mutual, at least on my end it is. And I will not be silenced you you.
Ron, first rule of being a liberal. Always deny you are a liberal. We’ve seen enough of your posts to know you’re a liberal, but feel free to keep denying it. You have learned well form Saul Alinsky’s book. Favorite reading material for liberals.
Libby, I am not trying to silence you by any means (that “oh, shut up, Libby” comment was tongue-in-cheek…I thought you had a sense of humor?). This blog would be boring without you on it, and I have to say that you do keep me on my toes! So, thanks!
Wow! A compliment? Thanks!
Contrary to what you may think, Libby…I like you…as Lou Grant said to Mary Richards “I like you…you have…spunk”!!
Typical Republican/Conservative, if you are not with us 100%, you are a Liberal. How many Liberals do you know that are against higher taxes, lower spending, less government, the PPACA, Representative Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid? I am also for less regulation and allowing the free market to work.
I have never read Alinsky. I am more into economics. I have mostly studied Friedman, Keynes, von Mises and Hayek. I do not completely agree or disagree with any of them, but I lean toward the Libertarian economic theories. However, I do believe the government has a role in the economy, especially providing services that I believe should not be for-profit such as defense, infrastructure, education and health care. These all lead to a more efficient and productive society that should benefit all of the people.
I have been looking into the Libertarian party and have a question you may be able to answer. It appears the LP is for government providing limited services but against income tax. How do they propose to pay for the governmental services (defense, etc.)? I couldn’t see anything on their website explaining that.
By the way Sargeant, Kay Hagen of NC and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana are in big trouble with their constituents and they don’t want Obama to come to their states either. Remember when Charly Crist of Florida was running for the Senate against Rubio and gave Obama a big hug and then promptly lost in the primaries? He then switched parties and tried again as a Democrat and lost by a big margin. That is called wearing out your welcome.
That is why I could not support a true libertarian. They believe in privatization of most public services and that the government should be funded by lotteries, endowments, usage fees, and consumption taxes. I see too many problems and limited revenue. We would need to cut spending, especially defense, to dangerously low levels in order to function with that limited revenue potential.
My advice to IDK was to make sure he cancels his policy if offered employment by an employer of 50 or more. The law actually includes a fine for employers whos employees dependents who obtain any subsidized coverage. What if an employee does not personally get a subsidy but his dependent children obtain subsidized coverage through the ACA and do not notify the employer.
Does an employer now need to look at every employees tax return and make sure they have not claimed a dependent who is getting a subsidy? This is a mess! That is why we need to repeal and replace this crap.
The law regarding fines has nothing to do with dependent coverage. The law states as long as you offer affordable coverage – meaning the Employee-only portion of the premim is no more than 9.5% of the average corporate wage you WILL NOT be fined.
If you offer coverage but it is not affordable, then you are fined $3k for every employee receiving a subsidy.
If you choose to offer NO COVERAGE – you will pay a $2k fine for every employee over the first 30. So, if you have 51 employees and you do not choose to offer any type of health coverage, you will pay 21 x $2,000 = $42,000 in fines.
You being such a savvy businessowner, I thought you would have known all this. Shucks, I’m just a lowly employee and I know it.
Sarah and FFA – It’s 2014 now. I have already earned enough income in 2014 that I will not qualify for an ACA subsidy. Sarah -Can you read this. FFA – Thanks for the good wishes!
If what you say is true, you must have earned a great deal of money in January or February? Subsidies I thought were a sliding scale up to around $60K a year of earnings for a family.
I really am not aware or have looked into the actual subsidies limits as I have no interest in obtaining support from anyone else for my bills.
He probably got a nice severance package.
What’s that, Libby? Are you ASS-uming that he got a nice severance package? Talk about talking out of both sides of your face.
Yes, I suppose I was. You caught me.
So, when we point out to a rightie (I’m looking at you, Agent) on this blog that they are wrong or hypocritical, they spin their position or change the subject. But Libby took responsibility.
Liberals taking responsibility, wow that is something new. Kind of like when Hillary said, She was responsible for the problems of Benghazi, or when The head of the IRS said they were responsible for targeting citizens and groups that are conservative, or Sebielius said she was accountable for the ACA rollout. A liberal claims responsibility but does nothing to correct it. Liberals talk about responsibility but do nothing to fix it. Christy claimed responsibility and fire half his staff. How many people has Obama fired for the above issues? how many at the IRS were fired? How many at HHS, How many people did Hillary fire at the State Dept. The only one was a whistle blower. Hmmmmm. Responsibility means different things to conversatives and liberals
Well, at least I admitted my mistake. You have yet to admit you were wrong about the employer mandate.
WOW!!! Got your client list? I’ll go 50/50 split on the house revenues. You can work from home.
Dont know where your at, but I will another Non Resident License.
So Ron, do you think I respect someone who voted for Obama twice? Libby and you are entitled to your opinion, but we have learned you really don’t have an opinion on anything since you rely on websites for your opinion and quote Keynsian leftist economists like Paul Krugman at the drop of a hat. Yes, your true colors have been shown over and over and I would suspect Bob to take you to the woodshed again soon.
Do you think I respect someone who voted for Mitt Romney? Hater of the 47% (of which I am not.) With his binders of women? With his flip-flopping on every issue? You’d have to be out of your mind to vote for him.
OMG, please, Libby. I can only assume here that, you are one of those liberals who really believes that there is a war on women in America. Pathetic.
Always trying to deflect the ignorance of the Obama administration right Libby? The liar in charge continues to sink in every aspect of his second term and you want to talk about Romney. I think Romney was the guy who said Russia was a real threat while Obama and Mr. Gaffe Biden blew it off. In fact it was Obama who pulled the missiles (unilaterally,I might add) that George Bush placed in Poland and Turkey. Which pissed off Turkey and Poland. Then he sends Hillary with a plastic push button to Russia for a “reset” (Not only that but they spelled the message in Russian wrong!). Let’s start over and we love you. What an idiot. A moron on high. So while he was making fun of Romney’s position on foreign policy he was totally off the planet. In the meantime Putin looks at Obama as a limp wristed liberal who he can take advantage of. That is a fact
Question for you- Name one place in the world where the position of the United States is stronger today than when G Bush left office? Including our allies?
Sarge, Agent specifically said he didn’t trust anyone that voted for Obama twice. I answered that I didn’t trust anyone that voted for Romney. How is that deflecting?
You, on the other hand, go off on rant about Russia, Turkey and Poland. Who’s doing the deflecting here?
I do not expect any Republican/Conservative to respect anyone with an opposing point of view. We scare you because we have facts on our side, regardless of the source. Until you start providing data with a cited source to support your positions, it is your point of vieew/opinion, NOT FACT. Stop discrediting sources and start providing your own facts.
I have also quoted libertarian and conservative economists. You do not like it when I do because it shows President Reagan was not nearly as conservative in reality as in the minds of Conservatives.
Trust me, Ron…nothing about you scares me. Except, of course, the total ruination of our country, at the hands of liberals.
Well, get ready. We outnumber you.
Really, Libby? Get ready?? You obviously have no problem with YOUR party ruining the country. How Anti-American is that?!
I don’t believe they are ruining the country. That’s where you and I differ. But if you guys get a decent candidate, I’ll consider voting for him/her. So far you’ve failed miserably in that department. I was all set to vote McCain when Hillary was defeated, but not after his vice-presidential candidate was announced.
Please quantify your statement, “You obviously have no problem with YOUR party ruining the country.”. Remeber to provide data/statistics and a cited source.
Ron, please add my disrespect to any two faced Independent who first states that Reagan was his favorite President and then tries to paint him in an unfavorable light, calls him a Keynsian, points out his unfavorable poll rating for a very short period of time and fails to point out that he was probably the most popular President in the past 100 years and truly one of our greatest Presidents in the history of the country. I guess you missed my comment on the last blog where I pointed out all the great things he did after the Carter disaster to recover the country. I am not going to reprint it for you since your brain could not possibly comprehend it.
Maybe after Kennedy he was…
President Reagan is my favorite president becasue he incorporated economic principles of Friedman and Keynes to get the country out of the mess he inherited from President Carter. Ask any Libertarian economist if President Reagan was a strict Conservative and did not implement any Keynesian principles, they will tell you no.
However, the fact remains that his lowest approval rating, regardless of the reason, is still lower than President Obama’s lowest. Can you provide proof to contradict that statement?
Ron, trust me, you scare no one on this blog. You are a website Tiger and most of the trash you post is old, outdated sites from years ago. Also, you tend to believe government websites when they have been lying about anything and everything on every major statistic on the economy. Then, you trot out leftist websites thinking someone will believe them. Do you think the Obama Administration has told the truth on any facet of Obamacare from the get go? How many times does he have to lie to you before you get it? The last count I saw was 39 times on tape. That was a regurgitation of all the speeches he made when he was trying to sell it. Apparently, you were one of the low information voters who bought it since you voted for him twice.
Sarah, the President famously said a few weeks ago to O’Reilly that there was not a “smidgeon” of corruption with the IRS. What happened? Lois Lerner again pleaded the 5th Amendment when asked a simple question. She couldn’t swing an immunity deal with the committee so she clammed up again rather than disclose who her bosses were that she got her marching orders from. In my view, it came out of the White House, down through Treasury to the IRS. These are the thugs we are dealing with and Ms Lerner should be jailed for Contempt to cool her heels until she gives them up.
Libby, Kennedy was the last of the Truman Democrats who actually had some common sense and he would be considered Conservative by today’s standards. Put him in with the sharks in the current Progressive Democratic Party and they would eat him alive or he would have to convert to their agenda. I liked him to as a young man for his style, smarts and grace and his beautiful wife. Of course when I found out about his philandering, that brings him down several notches below Reagan. Ronnie was clearly the best we have seen in our adult lifetimes and it is a shame there isn’t another Ronnie in the wings to pull this country out of the doldrums.
I was going strictly off of approval ratings, Agent. Kennedy had the highest, but then again he wasn’t around long enough to mess it up either.
I, personally, like Clinton, but I like Reagan, too. I voted for him. Twice.
President Reagan would suffer the same fate in today’s GOP as President Kennedy in the current Democratic Party. Just look at the tax and spend policies he instituted to rescue the country from a major economic recession. He increased spending and debt each year he was in office.
In addition, here are the deficit numbers during his terms:
FY 1989 – $153 billion.
FY 1988 – $155 billion.
FY 1987 – $150 billion.
FY 1986 – $221 billion.
FY 1985 – $212 billion.
FY 1984 – $185 billion.
FY 1983 – $208 billion.
FY 1982 – $128 billion.
If the buck stops at the president, and we should blame President Obama instead of Congress, do not blame Congress during President Reagan’s administration.
Ron, thanks coper making our point for us. I’m sure you’re challenged at basic math as most liberals are. In 8 years Reagan ran up debt of just over $1.4 trillion according to your numbers. Obama runs up that much debt in a little over a year. and then continues to do so year after year after year. Are you serious in the comparison? Do you understand basic math? And you boy has the gumption to say we don’t have a debt problem? After he said we had a debt problem with GWB running up annual deficits of less than half of Obama’s? Do you think we are as stupid as you liberals?
You’re missing the picture, and it’s really annoying.
You try to say cliche lines in order to defend Obama, and then try to make them the same scenario on Reagan. It’s not the same.
Let’s give an example: Congress passing spending. True. But if the president doesn’t get a plan from congress to pass, as you have pointed out about republicans in current congress (hypocrite) they can’t pass a good spending plan. Reagan did NOT campaign for the spending he received. In bi-partisan manner, he had to accept the democrat’s will. Just as the Clinton had to accept the 1995 republican congress cuts combined with his rate increases.
Now on the current side of things, for debt reduction, if congress put forth spending cuts, and Obama refuses to pass them, it’s his fault the spending is high. If Obama passes a stimulus plan, that he campaigned on, it’s his fault.
You preemptively said don’t say it’s congress because you want to put a liberal slant, like a pompous ass like you are.
Yet you blame republican congress for not presenting plans all the time. How the hell is that equal Ron?
You create scenarios where republicans you lose, republicans you lose, democrats you lose, but slightly less. You ARE a left leaning voter, you ARE NOT a conservative voter.
This was not meant to be a comparison, only pointing out that President Reagan was not the fiscal conservative everyone wants to make him out to be. As I have stated several times, he is my favorite president during my lifetime. He was able to lead the country out of the mess left by President Carter and was a true uniter.
Based on the current state of the GOP, do you honestly believe that he would make it as a candidate based on the fact that, during his presidency, spending and debt increased, he had annual deficits that ranged between $128 billion to $221 Billion, and he signed bills that increased taxes including Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, which was the largest tax increase in the nation’s histroy at that time? I find it ironic that Grover Norquist, the author of the no tax increase pledge, was part of Reagan’s Administration.
Just read this article from the Libertarian mises.org website.
Is bob talking again?
There’s a reason I’m not blind and you are.
You block out what you don’t want to hear
“Is bob talking again”
So why is the stimulus not Obama’s spending? Why is QE not his spending? Why is the fact that he tried and is still trying to remove the only spending cuts we have made not his spending? (sequester). Why is his suggested transportation not his spending? Why are his deficits not his deficits?
I can answer why Reagan’s aren’t his: HE DIDN’T CAMPAIGN ON AND SPEAR HEAD A SPENDING CAMPAIGN.
A spending campaign was launched on him by congress.
He tried to cut, congress wouldn’t let him.
With Obama, he tried to spend, congress (tried) to not let him.
Obama and Reagan are NOT the same on spending. Get over it kid.
LA LA LA LA not listening! (that’s you) Really?
That’s how you learned to deal with life? Blinders on an independent with ad hominem reasons to not listen to debate, is NOT an independent.
By the way look at your own statement and numbers:
He increased spending and debt each year he was in office.
So either you’re stupid, or you manipulated that quote. I’m sure debt still went up, but as I see, those years started going down toward the end, so they didn’t go up each year.
Also: There are 3 parts of the government that can cause a hiccup, and it is NOT the same each time, so don’t try to say it’s either always congress or it’s always not congress. That is ignorant.
With Obama his increased spending was a choice, he said on air “of course it’s a spending bill, that’s the point” about stimulus, when congress tried to stop him. He said on air that cutting the budget will harm the economy as part of his campaign. He used it to win his second election.
Now did Reagan campaign on spending? Or did he try to cut and congress stopped him?
In Obama’s case congress couldn’t stop him. In Reagan’s case, Reagan couldn’t stop congress.
You need to learn differences. You seem to be willing to let democrat issues be ok, because you are trying to make another republican event similar. This is just stupid Ron, as well as immature. You need to seek the truth. Not this twisted “everything is the same” argument you lie to yourself on (and then vote Obama)
If Kennedy were to run today, he would be considered a conservative and probably a Republican.
You’re right on this.
Kennedy was what democrats are “supposed” to be.
Awesome news. So now can I ditch the stupid Pediatric Dental plan I had to buy for the office health plan renewing 4/1 in order to comply with the requirements of the AHCA? Even though we’re three single, childless men in our late 40’s and mid 50’s!? Nope, no can do. We need to have Pediatric Dental. I’m going to schedule a dentist appointment for my non-existent child, then go and pick up my free birth control pills at CVS before heading off to get an abortion, since my plan covers it. When I get home I’ll order some Jenny Craig meals and get the AHCA discount.
You got it Ed. This is how socialism starts. First take over the healthcare system.
I guess you would have to adopt a kid for it to be worth your time.
Ed, you need that pediatric dental care to go along with the maternity care for your pregnant spouses.
Sergeant Major – even more irony to the requirement – I’m gay.
I think Sarge would say “Don’t ask. Don’t tell.”
Well, there you go. You get to pay anyway.
Well, you could adopt a pregnant teenager! :)
that’s a joke, by the way (before the haters attack me)
Good going Ron. All you do is post websites to try to make your point instead of thinking for yourself and weighing what was going on back in the day. Obviously, you weren’t around for the dark days of post Carter and didn’t know what Ronnie was facing. Obviously, you didn’t know that the Democrats were in charge of both houses of Congress when Ronnie was President. Obviously, you didn’t know that Tip O’Neil welched on the deal he made with Ronnie to hold down spending and that led to deficits. Please don’t try to blame reducing the tax rate to 28% from 70% under Carter for the deficits since revenue actually increased from creating jobs and more taxpayers. When the recession of Carter ended, we had 92 straight months of economic growth under Reagan and millions of new jobs created. That is the way to recover an economy. What is going on now, not so much.
Good one Bob, You run circles around Ron every time he posts his nonsense. By the way, Obama has proposed in his budget an additional $302 Billion for Roads & Bridges as a Stimulus. Have we not been down that road (Pun Intended) before with the last Stimulus that wasn’t a Stimulus? Ron likes to paint Reagan as a Keynsian Republican when nothing is further than the truth. Ron neglects to mention the now infamous Tip O’Neil who welched on the deal to curtail government spending. He also fails to mention that the country did recover under Reagan from the Carter disaster and millions of jobs were created and tax revenue increased because we had more taxpayers. The tax rate declined from 70% under Carter to 28% under Reagan and more revenue was created. Gee, it is amazing what cutting taxes will do to stimulate an economy, isn’t it?
Of course you think bob runs circles around me, you are his sidekick/little buddy.
He is a hack who only speaks of methodology and uses profanity and condesention to amke his point. Talk about childish.
If you had a reading comprehension level higher than the 3rd grade (12th garde in TX), you would have noticced that I have praised President Reagan for leading us out of the mess created during President Carter’s administration.
It is not just me who believes Reagan implemented Keynesian princilpes, read some Libertarian economists some time. I ave posted this article a few times. Have you read it yet?
You’ve spoken of methodology, and by the by:
Methodology is the most important. Not a source war. You struggle with who to believe. You never make up your mind on methodology.
You just insulted me with “hack” in a phrase I wasn’t even involved in. You’re full of it Ron!
Also: Reagan was not Keynesian in policies. He would have had to have went for the higher spending for that to be true.
He didn’t. Congress set the spending, he worked with what he had.
You are right Bob. Ron struggles with what to believe since he has admitted to being a two faced Independent. He obviously doesn’t know right from wrong and readily accepts the teachings of the left wing colunnist Paul Krugman of the NYTimes. He thinks he can get away with calling Reagan a Keynsian spender and I won’t let him. A Democratic Congress led by the infamous Tip O’Neil was responsible for the spending and refusal to cut spending during Reagan’s time in office.
Repeal and Replace this piece of garbage partisan legislation! Obama knows it is crap and that is why he keeps changing it, amending it and delaying it! If he did not know it was garbage, he wouldnt keep doing it!
See ya back to work!
Wow Sarah. 92 comments before I pulled this forum up. The comments I went through point out that it is truly an Obamanation cooked up by Progressives to assume control over Healthcare in this country. What is this, 30 changes to it since November? You can keep your plan if you like it, Period! You can keep your doctor or hospital if you like them, Period! Oops! No you can’t. You have to sign up or lose your coverage. Oops! Now you can keep your substandard unapproved plan. Why? We have an election coming up in November and we want you to be comfortable with your coverage we are saving for you.
Comments were over 100 by the time I first got here. I was beginning to wonder where everyone was for the last week. No article went over 30 comments. For a week! Most were in the single digits. Man, it was boring! ;)
I hear ya! This is the most fun I have all day…
KY jw, I guess you missed the one on AIG Cutting Jobs. That was 278 comments and counting. It got ugly with Libby telling FFA & I how to run our agency and that we didn’t know premium from revenue. Libby has never been an owner of a business/Agency, but she sure didn’t mind poking her nose in our business (unsolicited) and then lecturing us. I had to put her in her place several times and she didn’t like it much.
Oh, Agent. Why do you have to make silly comments like that? You didn’t put me in my place.
You and FFA use premium as a way to determine income. I don’t agree with that methodology, since premium does not make a damn bit of difference in the agency world. It’s all about commission/revenue.
If you write a $100,000 policy at 0% commission, you’ve made nothing, but you’ve got $100k premium on the books.
I don’t expect you to understand.
That article was more than a week ago, wasn’t it?
Yes, but Agent loves to dredge up ancient history and rewrite it. It makes him feel superior.
Hi agent. Busy day again? Had to call my service rep back Ive so slammed.
Great FFA. I am glad you got her back to help you. Now, you can concentrate on your P&C and building your agency up after the Obamacare foray which cost you money and heartache. We are getting rolling on our new website and will be getting Marketing training on its use Thursday. We hope to be driving more business our way. It is really neat. If you ever want to try that, I will be glad to send you their website and you can decide on the merits. It is very inexpensive to put it in and monthly payments are great compared to our old site that was dysfunctional and expensive.
I get a lot of hits off my web site. Most people just looking for information. Then they pick up the phone and call. Chatting with my producer, my monthly marketing routine is producing calls and many are dying on the desk. I have always had good luck hiring people from the local college. Happy to work for $10.00 an hour. They telemarket like no ons biz. Generate sales and then move on when they graduate. So I pay them new biz and I keep all renewals.
Took a mid market ap today and pushed it through the chain, so hopefully, Ill hit on that too. My producer on the other hand is getting skunked….
Well, we just got it installed and a few hits already came up. They turned out to be distressed people with low credit and had no insurance. Those are the toughest to write and we have to send them to Progressive for Auto coverage. That ends up being high. We hope we start getting a better mix and some more legitimate prospects as we go along.
So FFA, are you paying these kids a finders fee for the new biz and then coding the commission to the agency? I hope they aren’t discussing coverage options with the potential customer. I am assuming when the prospect pops up, someone with a license does the actual quoting and puts it together.
It really depends. My Comm Marketing starts with Comp. Not much coverage to discuss there. If they dont want to license, I’ll give them $25.00 for each submission. When the program is worked like it should, they should be pulling in maybe 8 – 10 a month. When the 130 gets filled out, it gets passed to a licensed agent. If they get licensed, I’ll give them 25% of the house cut. After a few months, they end up making somewhere in the $15.00 an hour range. I get the comp and move on the rest.
Actually Libby, I put you in your place about a dozen times and then you got cranky and said Yes, massah. That is racist by the way. You have no business trying to tell an agency owner how to run their business or how to calculate income from operations. FFA and I know how to do that and have been for many years. We also like to talk premium volume on accounts. It was and is none of your business.
FFA made it my business when he posted his new business numbers and I questioned whether that was premium or commission. I’ve been in this business for 34 years, Agent. I think I know a thing or two about running an agency. I’ve done nearly every job you could imagine, from licensing, contracts, contingency, accounting, P/L, C/L, claims and loss control. I don’t need to be an agency owner to know about running an agency. I’ve also taken classes on it (CIC and CPCU.) More than you can say.
Typical sour grapes reply Libby. Why don’t you try to tell Sargeant and Sarah how to run their agency while you are at it? You know what CPCU stands for don’t you? Can’t produce, Can’t Underwrite. So what if you have taken courses. My head CSR could run circles around you in helping us write and retain business and does it with a smile on her face, not constant rancor that you possess in spades.
CPCU stands for Chartered Property Casualty Underwriter. Show some respect for people who made sacrificies and worked to become more educated and develop their careers. I know you are trying to make an old joke, but you fail as usual.
I earned my CPCU and, trust me, I have been both a successful underwriter and producer.
I love how you say Libby and I do not show the appropriate respect for agency owners because we are not agency owners, which is a totally false premise. Then you disrespect a designation without knowing what it takes to earn the CPCU designation and understand the material.
Once again you make assumptions about people that you know NOTHING about.
If Sarge or Sarah would like my help in running their agency, I will gladly give it. For a fee.
Ron, I must disagree. There is no better education then being there. Doing that. No amount of class room time makes up for experience.
I will agree that there is no substitute for experience. An education like CPCU gives you knowledge about aspects of the indusrty for which you may never be exposed by working in an agency. You learn more about underwriting, operations, ratemaking, personal financial planning, regulations, etc. that give you tools to have more in depth discussions with some of your clients, and therfore, provide greater service.
In my experience, the best employees combine experience with education.
Ron, I know what CPCU stands for. You know who told me the Can’t Produce, Can’t Underwrite joke? A friend who was a CPCU. He laughs about it. Too bad you don’t see the humor in it. By the way, he was a nice guy and was affiliated with the agency, but he still couldn’t sell a lick and had to rely on teaching courses or he would have starved. It is a good thing you have a job that doesn’t require you hit the streets to bring something in to write or you would starve as well.
Libby, you didn’t question. You told me I was wrong talking Premium Volume.
I questioned you whether you were talking premium or commission. When you answered premium, then I told you you were wrong. And you are.
And there you are telling me again. We all know 10% is a good middle ground average comm rate. But yet, you went on and on and on. You never did respond to this question:
X (Premium) time 5% (Comm Rate) = $5000 (Comms)
100,000 (Premium) time 5% (Comm Rate) = Y.
Solve for X. Then Solve for Y. What is the difference?
Now, plug Zero in for X. What does Y equal?
Remember my point – they are both the same. If the math proves differently, I will gladly tell you you are 100% right and I am 100% wrong. I stand by my position that we are both 100% correct.
I’ll try one more time, FFA.
Y x 15% = $15,000
Y x 5% = $5,000
How much money did your agency make? If you want to say I have a $5M agency, we can use the average 10% to ballpark you at a $500,000 agency. However, when you say “I wrote a $6,200 ACCOUNT” – that premium amount is irrelevent to knowing how much money you actually made.
PREMIUM DOES NOT PAY THE BILLS.
Libby – Answer the question please. Stop deflecting. Do the math. It will prove you right or wrong.
I’m not deflecting. You are failing to grasp the point. I’m not discussing it any further with you two.
Actually, Kyjw, the article was written on 2-14-14 and comments were hot and heavy right through last Friday, 2-28-14. Some ancient history, huh? Libby fires her guns and they are all blanks as I amply demonstrated.
Lucky for you, they’re blanks – cuz they’re bullseyes every time! LOL!!!
Libby, you and Ron can’t hit the broad side of a barn as your comments demonstrate every day.
I pretty much quit following the articles after they drop off the handy little link on the right side of the IJ page. That happens after a week. So, for the week prior to this article, the links had really pitiful comment numbers.
Bob & Libby should get a room and duke it out. Enough already.
It’s called debate, FedUp. If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
Actually, I rather like her debating even though we get into it hard. Sometimes some personal issues I have been having make me cross lines I admit, but there’s a reason I debate with her. I enjoy her level of research, like on the above commentary with the scenario Sarah spelled out and she did very well in explaining it.
At least she hammers hard evidence even if I’m pissed.
I’d rather a strong willed sometimes obnoxious person, than a weak one.
I hope my daughter turns out similar in the strong mind.
2 compliments in the same day? I’m in hog heaven!!!
Fed Up! A liberal can only use two tactics when arguing. Ridicule and or the ability to wear their opponent down with deflection or justification for bad behavior or ideas by pointing to worse behavior by the opposition in the past. It is like playing chess with a pigeon, no matter how much you know about the game, studied etc.. The pigeon with always jump up into the middle of the board, knock over all the pieces, then crap all over the board and finally somehow with a strait face, strut around vicorious! It is just mind blowing sometimes!
You only get ridicule when you make an incorrect statement and refuse to change your position when presented with the real facts. That kind of dimwitted position deserves ridicule.
I laughed when I read this.
I’m sorry to say I find myself in this mindset too often as well. It’s why when I believe you make an un-researched comment I throw out some edgy bad comments.
We all need to take a chill pill here. Seriously. :)
PERFECT analogy, Sarah!!!! Touche!!!!
Stop calling Agent a Liberal!! He will not like it much.
Sarah was coming after you and Libby Ron, not me. Too bad your brain could not comprehend that.
Funny, I can just see you taking a crap on the chess board and strutting around like you just did something great.
I am sorry. When I read, “A liberal can only use two tactics when arguing. Ridicule and or the ability to wear their opponent down with deflection or ideas by pointing to worse behavior by the opposition in the past.” you immediately came to mind. Defending President Reagan’s Keynesian policies by referencing President Carter ring a bell?
Either you are a Liberal or Conservatives partake in the same debate strategy.
I didn’t think they were that bad. Compared to previous topics, this debate has been pleasant.
I think Bob and I have come to an understanding and we both want to be more respectful to each other. I rather like it.
I must admit, I don’t miss the cussing. :)
With out the cussing, it just sounds like another political cartoon…. Er.. Um.. Campaign.
HAHAHAHA on all accounts.
Really Ron? I have met a number of CPCU’s over the years and have yet to see one be a top sales producer. I actually had two associated with my agency back in the day and neither could sell their way out of a paper bag. We had to cut one loose for non-production and the other taught insurance courses on the side to have an income because he certainly couldn’t sell. By the way, the customers he did write were some of the more troublesome we had with claims experience and we had to move them around with carriers when they wore out their welcome. You are nothing but an order taker with a broker. How many times have you hit the street to drum up new busines, bring it in and put it together and get the name on the bottom line? That is not what Brokers do. They wait for submissions from agents and then quote it to them. CPCU’s are typically egghead professor types who know coverage, but don’t have marketing skills. Too bad they don’t seem to teach that in the courses they take.
Once again, Agent, you’re talking out your ass. A broker represents the client. An agent represents the carrier. Didn’t you learn that in your licensing exam? I consider myself both, since I’m contracted by the carrier but in truth I represent my client.
And I can tell you haven’t been around the block much (ever been out of East Texas???) Some of the most successful producers I’ve known have taken the time to obtain professional designations. There is something wrong with someone that frowns on others getting an education and bettering themselves.
You belittle us to make yourself feel superior and it’s a little pathetic.
Wrong again Libby. An agent represents the client and the company. How did you get licensed? How many times did you have to take the test to pass it? I aced mine. So you are contracted with the carrier? Hmm! All our markets contract with the agency, not a CSR. Do you get Contingency Income from your appointment? I guess you are an agent after all and didn’t even know it.
I said I was both, Agent. And NO, an agent does not represent the client – they are an AGENT of the company. And, YES, the carrier contracts with the agency and also each agent selling/soliciting their products.
Wow. I can’t believe you’ve been in this business for longer than 5 minutes with those comments. Here are some links for your edumacation. We know how it’s lacking down there in Texas…
And I’m not a CSR.
If you aren’t appointing all your agents with all your carriers, you may want to check with your DOI to make sure you are in compliance…
I did licensing for several agencies. You obviously haven’t.
Agent, you cannot represent both the Client and the Insurer. That’s like a lawyer representing the defendant and the claimant. It’s not practical and really, I don’t think it’s ethical.
Anyone that has taken a licensing exam should know the difference between and agent and a broker. I’ve forgotten more about insurance than Agent has learned.
Agents do not need to know about insurance, only how to close the deal. Insurance knowledge is for underwriters, brokers, company executives, actuaries, etc. That is why those people earn the CPCU designation.
I don’t agree with that, Ron. You most certainly do need to know about insurance to structure a complex insurance program, to know what pricing you need to be competitive, and how to control losses and manage claims. I didn’t go to hours and hours of classes to obtain designations I didn’t need.
I need every bit of that knowledge, plus 30+ years experience to do my job well. I counsel my clients on everything from H.R. issues to buying a new operation. I help them control their total cost of risk, not just sell them an insurance product.
That’s what Agent does.
Oh! I see what you’re saying now. Since I consider myself a broker and not an agent, I agree.
As I mentioned previously, I started as an agency producer and was very successful bringing in business for the agency owner.
The CPCU designation helped me gain more breadth of knowlege of the insurance industry. My experience provided depth of knowledge in underwriting, ratemaking, and coverage forms.
I will agree with you that CPCUs tend to not be the best producers, though I know a few very successful ones here. I have discovered that most, not all, agents/brokers do not have depth of knowledge regarding insurance. They are sales people, not insurance people. That is not a criticism, just my experience.
The CPCU designation is more designed for underwriters and company executives, hence forth the Underwriter part of the title of the designation. If it was called CPCP and they could not produce, then you would have an argument.
Ron, would it surprise you to know that most Independent Agents go through a lot of training prior to being an agent? I learned the trade from Liberty Mutual who put all their young agents through product training, sales & marketing and it was a never ending process. Libby thinks Liberty people aren’t very smart and she had to hold their hand to work in the IA system. I assure you that they are not or they wouldn’t have been hired to start with. After I joined the agency ranks, first as a producer and later as an agent, I had to complete 30 hours of classroom training every two years for CE requirements. I did that for 20 years. I took some CIC as well during that time. I will grant you it is not CPCU, but it was very good training and I know my stuff on most lines of insurance, particularly what I sell to clients I have. CPCU is egghead stuff and is not practical in the real world. I listened to a CPCU professor named Emmit Vaughn of the University of Iowa several times and he was describing coverage carriers don’t even write and he didn’t have a clue on how to sell it. It was all theory without any practicality to it. By the way, experience in working in the industry is extremely valuable and I have a wealth of that.
No they don’t. Those days of carriers training agents are over, Agent. Now, you study for your exam and if you’re lucky, you have an agency mentor.
And I never said Liberty agents weren’t very smart. I said the exact opposite. But the 2 I worked with did not have any experience on the IA side of things and I did have to teach them the ropes. They were appreciative and are very successful producers in their own right.
Everytime you try to put words in my mouth, I will correct you and take you to task. You have the worst reading comprehension of anyone I have ever known.
My Regional Carrier offers regular training specific to that carrier. Every week there is something going on in a Class Room setting. They also have regular quarterly meeting and monthly visits from the reps. They also do training local. Rent a room, pack it full and pass out what info they think is relevant to the topic at hand.
Yes, but they are only training you on their products, not on how to be a successful agent.
Back in the day, Hartford, Aetna, and Travelers all had producer schools where they would fly you to Hartford, put you up, and teach you the insurance business in 3 weeks. Those days are over. Hartford still does it, but it costs several thousand dollars.
I know you guys just love to argue with me, but I DO know what I am talking about.
Thats not correct either. My Regional runs a 4 day class on Agency Management. They offer at no charge to have an agency evaluation done and confab with the principle as to how to run more efficiently.
They even have a producer subsidy program. I am looking onto the details of that as it is based off VOLUME and I am where they want me to be. They offer equipment loans. They do more for agencies then does Travelers and Hartford combined.
What a puzzling reply Ron. I have been in this business over 30 years and never heard of a very successful producer in an agency settling for a salaried desk job. The sky is unlimited for a very successful producer in terms of income if he puts a lot of business on the books. Most agents will pay at least 40% on new business and slightly less for renewals. After you hit about $2 million in premium volume, you are in tall cotton even at conservative commission rates. Show me a CPCU in today’s world and I will show you a company exec or an underwriter. They are not out on the streets competing for business. It seems to be beneath them and that designation means little to the typical client.
I agree FFA. Libby does not know what she does not know. State Auto does extensive agent training and young producer training as well. Safeco has funded programs for agent training if you want to pay for it. Yes, they do websites, equipment loans, in house training if you like. AMS Vertafore also has a lot of training for agents on the technical issue of operating systems and we have put our licensed CSR’s through that. We get the best training we can. By the way, you know who the worst trained agents are? The captive Farmer’s agents followed by Allstate. They are as dumb as a doorknob. You should see what I see when I look at one of their policies. It makes one want to puke. I do enjoy handing them their head when I run across one. I wonder if the company provides their E&O to them for all their mistakes. They are bound to have a lot of claims.
Something going on with her. She is way more argumentative then in the past.
Exhibiting ADD. She says no.
Something had to change.
This whole string shows that she dont know everything.
Then again, if she deals with Surplus & Specialty lines. she would be correct. They dont train no one for nothing.
I do not serve the master called money. When I was a producer, I enjoyed speaking to underwriters and decided that I would be more interested in learning more. However, I was so busy bringing in premium for the agent I worked for that it was difficult to find the time to really learn about underwriting in depth.
Now that I am a broker, my experience as a producer and underwriter have made me very valuable to my company and they compensate me well. I agree that I could be making more as a producer or even owning my own agency, but that is not what drives me.
Until you stop thinking that everyone should be just like you and are slaves to the almighty dollar, you will not appreciate what everyone else in the world brings to the table.
I believe that I already pointed out that the CPCU designation is designed toward undwerwriters and company executives. They are the ones that need greater knowledge about insurance than agents/producers. All they need to know to be successful is how to close the deal. It is the job of underwriters and executives, and also actuaries, to make sure your book is profitable, from a loss ratio standpoint.
FFA – I never said I knew everything. And I don’t have ADD. You and Agent continuously insult me and I’m getting pissed off. No mystery illness or sudden trauma in my life. I’m just fed up with both of you.
Since my plan(s) were in compliance by the first of the year, as the law demanded, who do I see about getting a refund?
Didn’t you get a big subsidy to buy Wayne? You should demand it from the carrier who wrote your coverage.
LOL…. Good luck! This is Government! I believe it comes from your carrier when you buy the product.. Although really not sure. I can tell you that this is going to just one of the many service issues that the liberals did not anticipate when they passed this huge smelly pile of crap!
You are right FFA. I have 5 carriers who offer numerous training all the time by webinars or classroom on products they are introducing. We don’t have time to attend all of them or we could not get any work done so we have to divide it up among us. Libby is totally wrong about carrier training as usual. We have two carriers who have Young Producer training as well. I put my youngest partner through that when he started as a producer and we eventually made him a limited partner due to his growth and production. He had to attend a number of training classes. He will probably inherit my business one day when I retire. He is the future and he will pay me for my interest.
Ron, it might surprise you to know that I am not a slave to the all mighty dollar either, but I am not going to apologize for being successful in this business. I also chose not to settle for working for 30 years for a company or broker and retiring with a gold watch. To each his own. Being an Independent Agent is challenging, but worth it since we have some control of our destiny. If a man works hard, cultivates relationships with good companies, stays up with a rapidly changing industry, weathers the hard and soft markets, he should do fine even if he isn’t a CPCU. I have a lot of agent friends in our region and not one is a CPCU. Some are bigger than we are, some are smaller, all are successful because they know what it takes to succeed.
“If a man works hard, cultivates relationships with good companies, stays up with a rapidly changing industry, weathers the hard and soft markets he should do fine.”
You just described my career, Agent. Except for the man part.
Libby, except for one thing, you are not the appointed agent in this scenario. Your boss is the appointed agent. I think he is the one who obtains the markets and is the responsible party to the carrier/agent relationship. By the way, my female partner is on the agency name and is appointed as well to sign agreements, can sign the payroll checks and bills just like I can. Our licensed CSR’s can place business with a carrier under the agency name, but when it comes to the bottom line, the agency owners are who the companies do the business with.
Whatever, Agent. You’re obviously much more important that I am. Feel better now?
When do you focus on anything but money?
If you believe in “to each his own”, why do you denegrade Libby and me for being employees instead of agency owners?
Nobody is asking you to apologize for being successful. From where do you even get that? Oh yeah, another cute line from the right. Grow up and think for yourself for once.
With the retirement fund (stocks, bonds, 401k and IRA) that I am building, I will be able to buy you and me both plenty of gold watches. You do not need to have to sell a business to enjoy retirement.
I have as much control of my destiny as you. What will happen to your agency when President Obama destroys the economy to the point none of youyr clients have jobs and can pay their premiums? How much will you get for your agency then?
Ron, why do you feel the need to denigrate Agency Owners because they are successful? Are you a closet OWS type of guy? Do you have feelings of guilt that you didn’t have what it took to step out and try the agency business after your “successful” stint as a Producer? Personally, I don’t think you were ever a successful producer. All you ever wanted to do was pile up education credentials and be an order taker for a broker. By the way, if Obama does succeed in destroying the economy and I eventually lose my customers, the brokerage business will be before mine. You will be on the street long before I will. I have stocks, bonds, IRA also and a substantial interest in the agency. That puts me way ahead of you buster.
We know, Agent. You’re the greatest thing since sliced bread and the smartest guy in the room. What bravery, skill, and courage it took to buy your own agency! What a man! We are all in awe of your accomplishments and are guilt-ridden that we were unable to rise to anywhere near the greatness of you. It will be my everlasting regret that I didn’t turn out to be more like you.
Still focusing on money, you slave.
Please tell me when I have denigrated any agency owner or anyone else for being successful? I am all for successful people, I take their money to put food on the table, a roof over our heads, and a little away for retirement.
I am not concerned about losing my job anymore than you are. I only make that point to show that no one’s career/income is 100% safe.
Congratulations on being way ahead of me. Too bad for you that I do not care.
Irony, you just did it right there by saying “Still focusing on money, you slave.” that is denigrating someone for being successful, or that those who are focus on money,
Then of course “Congratulations on being way ahead of me. Too bad for you that I do not care.” Implies that you don’t care, but combined with the above comment, it shows that you believe focusing on money is bad, rather than you are neutral. Which is an attitude problem.
“I am all for successful people, I take their money to put food on the table, a roof over our heads, and a little away for retirement.”
By far the most condescending quote, likely sarcasm, if it isn’t though: Then you do denigrate successful people. Their work isn’t theirs, it’s yours for retirement. I’m assuming it was sarcasm tough, seeing as your social security tax certainly contributes to retirement fairly. In which case: Learn to be respectful. There are different types of respectful. I prefer to throw things right in your face (turns out you are not used to that, and would prefer to be a sleazy indirect crap thrower). Your methods are not superior to mine, and not much different.
That’s the difference between you and I. I don’t continually use your speech style as a reason not to debate with you. Pompous ass.
Bob – how can you jump on Ron after all the horrible things Agent said about employees and CPCU’s? To hear him tell it, we are all losers because we don’t own our own agencies and CPCU’s are eggheads and know-nothings.
Agent constantly crows about his “success” while implying that those on a different path are all failures. He fails to understand he would have nothing if not for his employees and those eggheads that help him place business.
He’s just a pompous ass.
You of all people should understand someone who has a “passion” problem that causes them to over stop bounds.
Ron specifically tries to pen out that he is better than agent and uses it as a selling point, while contradicting himself on the wealth issue, and that line, is a bait line to get Agent to cross further lines.
He’s basically trying to get Agent into a heads I win tails you lose argument.
Agent is conceptually correct in many conservative areas. He doesn’t get it across properly, and sometimes gets over the top, but so do all of us.
I don’t think you have to bait Agent to get him to cross a line. He is so dogmatic in his rhetoric as to be absurd. He can’t help spewing the same line of crap day after day, post after post. If it even appeared that he had an original thought in his brain or could intelligently debate or admit when he is wrong, I wouldn’t feel so strongly about him. He has never ONCE taken responsibility for posting false information, even after being fact-checked and confronted with the data. And not only that, he continues to parrot the same information as if saying it over and over will somehow make it true. I don’t even know how to deal with such ignorance and I get very frustrated with him.
Indeed he keeps up with being pissed without needing provocation. That’s passionate on topics. So when he gets certain responses from Ron especially, it winds him up more. Ron does it intentionally. There’s a reason Ron debates with Agent, which you have to admit, goes at it rather hard with Ron.
Off of that: You admit wrong data as much as he does.
And to date he has wrong data no more or less than others here. Ron has on this post said Reagan had increased deficits every year, then showed a chart showing them go down toward the end of Reagan’s presidency.
That is some serious inconsistency.
Hey, Great point Wayne! I want our refund too!! I also want my renewal Premium to go down by at least $2,500.00.
Libby, the queen of insult. Even Ron can’t hold a candle to you even though he tries hard. Since you haven’t tried it, you have no idea how much it takes to grow an agency and then own it, to take responsibility for the welfare of employees, to make appointments with carriers, make payroll each two weeks, make decisions on a daily basis that impact everyone in the agency. I have the respect of other agents in the community for being a good businessman and with my customers of being a good agent that looks out for them and I don’t need your sarcastic mean spirited comments to know I have worth.
Blah, blah, blah. We all know how successful and revered you think you are, Agent. Keep telling yourself that.
So you own your own agency. Great! It’s not exactly curing cancer or making life and death decisions. If you could do, I’m sure I could, too. I don’t want to.
But keep patting yourself on the back for being a boss. I only wish your employees knew what you think of them.
That comment makes me the Queen of Sarcasm, not insults.
Agent I find it ironic that you value your worth and are so confident in your worth and yet attack other peoples sense of worth by degrading them pursuing their education. Maybe transparent is a better word than ironic…
Free, I don’t downgrade them until they attack me. They think they are smarter than me and they aren’t. They attack constantly and expect me to take it and I won’t so we trade barbs all the time. Libby thinks it is sarcasm to call someone like FFA stupid. Is that sarcasm or just being mean spirited?
Okay so you degrade (not downgrade) education only as a useful tool when you’re “constantly” (doubt that) being attacked by people that did pursue education? So when you are not being attacked your beliefs about education are different? So you just bend your stance depending on what situation you are in? You should be a politician. I wouldn’t vote for you though, too liberal for my taste.
Honestly I don’t care if Libby is being mean or sarcastic that just semantics, she made a point and who cares what shade of cynicism she used? Also not sure why you even brought that up to a response to me…
I hate to disappoint you Ron, but I am anything but a slave. You are the one working for your master. A captive agent is also working for their master. I am Independent and free to place my business with a number of companies. It is too bad for you that I could care less what you have to say as well.
I only said that you are a slave to money. It is all that you focus on and you believe it is the only measure of success.
If you want to make that argument, then I would say you are also a slave to your clients.
Libby said- “They don’t like facts, Ron”
I have to laugh. People put fact after fact on this and you make that comment. If anyone shotguns comments it is the lunatic fringe liberals. So, I had several pieces in my post and what do the hang on? poll numbers- LOL
The other comment- “liberals taking responsibility” What a joke. All liberals do is TAKE and the blame someone else for the problems they cause.
Careful, Sarge…you said ‘shotgun’ while referring to a liberal…
The comment wasn’t “liberals taking responsibility”, it was Libby took responsibility.
What, EXACTLY, do liberals “take”? I pay my taxes the same as you. I work and contribute to society the same as you. I pay my bills and pull my own weight the same as you. What, and I’ll say it again, EXACTLY, am I taking???
Gee, Sargeant Major, I think I am officially a liberal taking something now. Well, kind of. In a round about way.
My dad is now a resident at a VA nursing home. Paid for by your tax dollars. (mine too, actually, since I work and pay taxes – but I guess since I’m a liberal it doesn’t count) Yep, since my dad has a 70% disability rating, the government picks up the tab. It’s a nice place, too. I would live there.
We all picked up my Dad’s, too. But since he eventually died from Agent Orange, I think it’s the least we could do.
In both your cases – Sarges too for that matter, I think the country owes that to our service men. They are more deserving then everyone in DC (unless they are vets).
FFA, I, too am a veteran like Sargeant and am proud of my service. Perhaps that is where I get my Patriotism from and why I get so mad at people who disparage the uniform. I would not think of getting treatment from the VA because I know how veterans are treated at most of them. One of my golfing buddies went there and he almost died from a gall bladder infection some months ago due to incorrect diagnosis and lack of a surgeon. He came back home, had the operation done locally and the surgeon said he would have been a goner in another week. He will never go back to the VA the rest of his life.
And only Sarge would thumb that down. Way to go, Sarge.
If he is in a VA nursing home, he earned the right to be there and the country owes it to him. That has nothing to do with my post
In the future you need to be more careful when making your bigoted slurs.
“Sargent Major says: That has nothing to do with my post”
Here’s the kicker: most of us don’t identify ourselves as LIBERAL or CONSERVATIVE. We’re in the middle.
For instance: I like guns, but don’t think it’s necessary for people to own a fully automatic AK-47 nor should someone with a history of mental illness or a convicted felon own a firearm.
I hate abortion, but I also don’t think it should be illegal, especially in matters of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life is at stake. That being said, I don’t think the government / taxpayers should pay for it.
I don’t care if gays want to get married, it does not affect my marriage in the least, but I also don’t care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home (in fact, I’d rather not hear about it).
I have no problem with immigration, but come here legally. However, those who came here ILLEGALLY (or were “anchor babies”) need to be given options to become legal, perhaps by serving in the military.
I’m not opposed to “enhanced interrogations” if it means saving the lives of innocents. We can never forget that we were attacked. That being said, we need to pull completely out of the Middle East and start focusing on our problems at home.
I don’t think weed should be legal for recreational purposes, but I also don’t think it should be as illegal as heroin.
As far as the healthcare mess: Something needed to be done to fix the mess, but I don’t think this bill was the right way to go, especially when the goverment can’t even run the postal service efficiently but we still expect them to be able to manage a healthcare program.
I believe you don’t spend more than you have, and you don’t borrow more than you can pay back.
I ask you: where do folks like me fit in to this discussion?
It is nice to see someone else like me in this discussion. The only point where we disagree is that I think weed should be leagl for recreational purposes.
You will be labeled a Liberal on this blog because you are not 100% Conseervative. The right just cannot accept someone in the middle and that is why they keep losing elections.
I would say you fit in right next to me, as that is how I think. (Except for the weed part.)
I’ve never considered myself one or the other.
I didn’t vote for Bush either time, but I also didn’t vote for Obama for either term (and I did vote in all 4 elections).
I’m a Christian, but don’t believe my way is the only way to Heaven. That being said, I get extremely irritated when people belittle religion or those who choose to believe.
I can’t stand Pelosi, Boehner, Obama, Reid, McConnell, Biden, Limbaugh, Maddow, Piers Morgan, Arianna Huffington, or Sean Hannity, but I will listen to each because every one has made some valid points. I read both the DrudgeReport AND the Huffington Post on a daily basis to try and get both sides of the story.
I have an incredible amount of reverence for our veterans and servicemembers, and think that THEY should be first in line for any “entitlements.”
I support the public education system, but believe there needs to be a more efficient way of dealing with bad teachers.
I enjoy the arts, but I don’t want taxpayer money funds to pay for a piece of art which will offend people (ie a statue of Jesus covered in filth).
I don’t believe Obama is The One, but I also don’t believe he’s the Antichrist.
I don’t want the Government spending one dime to study the mating habits of a species of snail.
I’m not completely sold on whether or not man is responsible for global warming or whether it’s occurring naturally. That being said, I’d rather live on a clean planet than a polluted one.
I think there needs to be stronger penalties for killing a cop, drunk driving, leaving the scene of an accident, and any kind of sexual abuse / assault. I am pro death penalty for certain circumstances, but if you’re going to use it, USE it.
I don’t care who’s gay in the NFL, NHL, NBA, etc. Congratulations. Do your job. Also, I don’t think it’s ok to be fine with an athlete getting paid millions for playing a game which 99.99% of play for free, yet everyone gets up in arms when a CEO (who creates jobs) makes the same amount.
Need I go on?
Well said. I will admit to agreeing with several of your points, but I have no clue what that means in the liberal v conservative debate.
Let me simplify the debate for you KYjw. Liberal= Left and Conservative=Right.
In the third chapter of the gospel of John, the disciples went out fishing. They threw their nets over the left side of the boat and despite fishing all night had not caught one fish. Jesus then told them to throw their nets over the right side of the boat and they caught so many, their nets were overflowing. That is a good lesson everyone should take to heart.
You even misquote scripture. There was nothing about the left and right sides of the boat. Only that they had not caught anything all night and Jesus said, “Cast your nets to the right.” Jesus was not suggesting a lucky cast. He was displaying his knowledge. He knew where the fish were and he was showing the disciples where to find them.
Agent, I was only referring to ralph’s point that he is neither.
I really do know there is a difference. Promise.
Took alot of the words right out of my mouth, Ralph.
The world is full of shades of gray and rarely just black and white. Vive la Difference and Live and Let Live!
Sarge, the mad censor. At it again! Funny how that is. Whenever you get on the site, suddenly my posts get hidden. And then you lie about it. Semper fi, liar!! LOL!!!
Ralph I agree with what you say which makes you a conservative. At least right of center. I’m surprised Ron says he agrees with you on in essence repealing Obamacare as he has been a proponent to it with moderate changes. Or maybe he’s not telling the truth.
And I most certainly agree with you on “enhanced interrogation” methods. I never understood the Obama lovers out there supporting his stance on banning such practices while supporting his KILLING of alleged terrorists via drone strikes with no trial or anything. Including American citizens. Makes Obama judge, jury and executioner. I guess in their mind it’s OK to actually kill these alleged terrorists, sometimes without all of the evidence needed to do so, but it’s not OK to “pretend to kill” them with the enhanced interrogation methods when we captured them red-handed and know they are guilty. As a rational person knows, we get a lot more information out of a known and captured terrorist that we interrogate than we do from an alleged terrorist that we kill.
Dave – I have not been a proponent of the ACA since it was implemented and have clearly stated it on this blog. It’s only because I am pro-choice and for marriage, you assume I fully buy into everything Democrat. Not true.
I do not support the ACA as it is currently written, but I do not support it’s repeal, either. Going back to nothing would not bring our Nation forward a bit. Let’s revise it and make it something better.
The only reason you are surprised is because you either do not read all of my posts, focus on a small segment of my piosts, or have the same reading comprehension level as Agent.
When have I EVER been a proponrent of the PPACA? I only dispute inaccurate statements. There is a huge difference.
I have posted several times that my biggest complaints about Republicans is that they, 1. did not address and implement their ideas for health care reform when they had control of all 3 branches of government from 2003-07; and 2. Wasted taxpayer money trying to repeal the PPACA when there was no chance of it happening in the current political environment. I thought you guys were the party of fiscal responsibility.
Now they want to complain. You had your chance. I can only hope they actually do something about health care when they regain control.
Regain control? I’m afraid that ship may have already sailed…
“Ralph I agree with what you say which makes you a conservative.”
That’s funny. I agree with him, so using your logic, he’s a liberal. Just these two statements alone fly in the face of the current conservative platform:
“I hate abortion, but I also don’t think it should be illegal”
“I don’t care if gays want to get married, it does not affect my marriage in the least”
Dave, you yourself have vehemently argued against those same issues. Not to mention his view on immigration.
We are all more alike than you’d like to think. Quit trying to label everyone.
“We are all more alike than you’d like to think. Quit trying to label everyone.”–and THAT, my friends, is my point.
Historically, you can look at EVERY presidential administration and find people who loved them and those who didn’t. Very rarely in politics is there a clear definition of RIGHT or WRONG. Take for example, Lincoln (my all-time personal favorite): Great guy, right? Great ideas, did what he had to do, etc. He freed the slaves, but guess what? He was not in favor of equality for all races. He kept the Union together, but at a cost of nearly a million lives and billions of dollars.
Lately it seems like the days of “reaching across the aisle” are done, and BOTH sides are guilty of it. With the advent of 24-hour news and social media, everyone is just looking to ZING the other side and get that “gotcha!” moment. Nobody wants to listen to all sides and come to a consensus, and it’s a shame.
It’s a lot like marriage: if you have to win every argument, chances are you’re not going to stay married for long. It’s a give and take: you come to a decision where you’re both equally satisfied or equally pissed off, and you live with it.
I hope this finds EVERYONE doing reasonably well and you all have a great weekend. Take a few minutes to enjoy what you HAVE, not what you WANT.
So Ralph, you make some good points, but you say you are in the middle. I can’t believe you weren’t criticized by the left by saying Obamacare was a bill since I was lambasted for doing it once.
Are you one of those Independents who can’t make up their mind who to vote for until the day of the election and part of the group all the politicians keep pandering to? From your post, you seem like a clear thinking guy. Do you need websites to tell you how to think or do you observe what is going on in the world and inherently know right from wrong? I didn’t notice Ron telling you to prove your sources on your opinion. I don’t apologize for being Conservative because the left is so wrong about so many things. Do you think this Administration is transparent about anything or deliberately lied to the American People? If you are going to cut them some slack and give them the benefit of the doubt, at least I will know how to respond to you. If I were going to judge your comment, I would say Center-right, but I could be wrong.
You may be the most worthless commenter on this site. Ralph is expressing his positions on different topics and you find a way to criticize him because he is not 100% Conservative. It is people like you that are the reason there are so few Conservative politicians.
Did you not criticize me in the past for first agreeing with you, then pointing out where I disagree? HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not go to websites to tell me how to think, only to prove that I am usually right and you are usually wrong. Until you can provide sources to support your narrative, stop criticizing others for doing some research.
Did you miss where he stated that he cannot stand Obama? Please go back to 3rd grade and learn some reading comprehension.
I agree with Ralph on all, but one position, I believe recreational use of weed should be legal. Tax it to generate revenue and release all of the inmates convicted of crimes involving weed to lower expenses. In addition, law enforcement can focus on real crimes.
Full diiclosure: I have never used, sold, or been involved with weed on any level and would not start even if legalized. I just believe in true freedom and liberty for all.
Does that make me center-right, too? Or does the weed position make me a full blown Liberal?
Ron, You are less than worthless as a commentator. As you have admitted before, you are a wishy washy two faced Independent who agrees and then disagrees, can’t figure out who to vote for, apparently doesn’t see the hypocrisy in Progressive ideology, criticizes Conservative left and right. We all know where you are coming from. I actually pegged Ralph as Center right from his comments. That is far from being center left or far left. At least he has some common sense which you lack in spades.
WOW, I’m gone for one day and this things blows up….
Hi FFA. Yes, we have had some lively exchanges similar to the AIG article that Libby thinks is ancient history even though comments were going strong through last week. Two faced Ron still can’t understand the hypocrisy of the left wing and does not know right from wrong. That is worse than Libby telling you how to run your agency last week. I hope everything is going well and you are writing more P&C. That is where the action is.
Agent – for clarification:
I did not tell anyone how to run an agency. I merely pointed out that most intelligent agents speak in terms of revenue and not premium. You chose to argue the point, thereby making yourself look like a fool.
And please explain, if you CAN, what hypocrisy the left wing portrays. You, sir, are the biggest hypocrite on her.
Actually Libby, after reviewing your comments, you were calling FFA stupid over and over. You do not get how agents talk and how we do business because you aren’t an agency owner. Regarding Hypocrisy on the left, pick a subject. The list is very long on lies and hypocrisy with this administration and government in general. I am just a straight forward Conservative and everyone on here except for Ron and you don’t seem to know right from wrong or how the Progressive agenda is crippling this nation. Is that clear enough for you?
As usual, as clear as mud Agent. But way to go to skirt the issues.
I know how agents talk, since I’ve been one for 34 years and have vast experience that you will never obtain. I’ve worked for small shops and I’ve worked for national brokers (not wholesalers).
You’re a small-town agent that’s never been out of East Texas. You’re way out of your league criticizing me, pal.
Stupid is as stupid does…
If the AIG article is ancient history, then so must Bush, Reagan and every other politician that has left office more then a week ago….
My wife surgery went well. Surgeon stated he saver her knee for at least 8 – 10 years before it need replacement… Very happy about that. I guess its just delaying the inevitable. But, we are still happy about the results.
I’m glad it went well FFA. We are awaiting the Spine Stimulator installation in my wife in a couple of weeks and are hoping that will work when 5 back surgeries didn’t. How much rehab will your wife have to do? Walker or crutches to get around? Sometimes the toughest thing is to get to and from the bathroom, lack of showering for a while etc. I have been there, done that.
I may have stated that I am two-faced, but not in the context to which you are referring. All I said was that I do not follow any party or ideology blindly and I am open to change my mind if someone provides new information. You are a lemming with no ability to research, process information and make up your own mind. You follow Cnservatives blindly without question.
If I agree with Ralph on 16 of the 18 points he made, and you call him center-right, how am I a Liberal? Because I keep pointing out your errors and poor reading comprehension? That just makes me smarter than you, not a Liberal.
We agree 100% Ron that you are two faced as you have now admitted several times. If you are so smart, why don’t you and Libby have your own agency instead of occupying a 4X4 cubicle at a Brokers office? I came from humble circumstances and worked my way up to an owner of a successful agency. I think I know the answer to that. Your personality is not suited to be an Independent Agent and you can’t sell anything, so you are content to be a salaried employee with few responsibilities, no payroll to make, no corporate taxes, no agency expenses, no carriers to deal with. In short, you, Libby, Planet, Ins102, Boogereater are just small cogs in a machine. Just keep on collecting that check and maybe you will get a gold watch someday if you avoid getting laid off.
Agent – You didn’t start your own agency, you bought one. Anyone can do that. So don’t act like you built something up, on your own, from scratch. You didn’t.
And you have yourself admitted that your CSR does all your apps, marketing, and servicing while you sit on your ass and blog all day.
I came from humble circumstances, too, and worked my way up to an Account Executive with a $1.2M book of business (revenue, in case you need clarification.) So what? It doesn’t make me better than you. But I’ll tell you one thing, I’m alot smarter than you.
You have a huge inferiority complex that requires you to put other people down to make yourself feel better. Maybe some therapy would help with that.
Libby, you are so full of it and think you are so smart. Every post you make, you dig a deeper hole for yourself. If you are that smart, buy and agency and do it yourself. I think you would run off more business than you would write and would shortly have it up for sale.
I don’t want to own an agency, Agent. If I did, I would already have one. I am getting to the point of planning retirement, why would I buy an agency?
You don’t have to be that smart to own an agency, but you do have to be pretty smart to keep $1.2M in commission business happy and renew it year after year. These were sophisticated insurance buyers that knew their stuff. You just continue to show your ignorance of the business and confirm your place as a small-town hick. Have you even ever SEEN $1.2M in commission revenue? LOL!! It’s more than your entire piddly agency. So go take a hike, pal.
Here are the reasons I do not own my own agency:
1. I like my job.
2. I make enough money to pay my bills and put some away for retirement.
3. I don’t have to put in 60+ hours a week to build an agency and I get spend time with my wife and kids, do volunteer work, and have time to ski, golf, play other sports, and go on vacation without someone calling me.
4. I enjoy busting my butt so someone ike you can live the American dream.
5. I do not have to deal with all of the stress that comes with owning an agency.
When you retire and sell your business for whatever multi-millions you get, I will say congratulations and good for you. Enjoy your retirement. I will not be bitter or jealous, just happy for you.
Instead of spending so much time trying to tear me and other salaried employees down, why don’t you show some appreciation for people like me who have contributed to youyr success? I appreciate what you and all other agency owners have done providing people like Libby and me the opportunity to become successful without all of your stress.
Ron, if you like your job, you can keep it. Where have I heard something similar to that? Good for you if you are satisfied with what you have going. I don’t know where you get the idea that an agency owner has to put in 60 hour work weeks to build an agency. I work very hard at what I do, but I get it done in a normal workweek and don’t spend weekends or stay til 8:00 every night to do it. I enjoy my free time as well and have outside activities like you do. Perhaps the agents you know are disorganized and aren’t run very well to have to do all the extra time. We also have very good employees who work efficiently and get the work out. I am glad I don’t have to place much business in the Excess/Surplus lines brokerages since most of mine is in the Direct Market for Commercial & Personal Lines.
So on one hand, you denegrate Ron and me for being “just an employee in a 4×4 cubicle” and on the other hand you say you have good employees?
Who are you, Sybil?
I was referring to those who start an agency from scratch, not buying someone else’s book. Every agent I know that started from scratch was working at least 60 hours a week and usually more. They were not in a position to hire any staff and had to take care of all the paperwork, taxes, accounting, etc. that an owner has to handle in addition to building their book of business.
Agent didn’t do that although he likes to make you think he did. He worked at an agency and when the owner retired, he bought it. Now he’s a bigshot agency owner. LOL!
Ron, many agencies will terminate producers when they get to a certain level. Then they go hire someone at half what the producer is earning for service reasons. Then they hire a new producer and the cycle starts all over again.
i was advised to get rid of my producer as he is one of the top expenses. My feelings, he built it. He should be able to reap the rewards. Besides, he will be retiring two to four years.
Only one way to make sure your job will always be there and that is to create your own job.
Would not be a bit surprised if that is what happened to idk.
I’ve never heard of anyone getting rid of a top producer. A producer that produces new business will always generate income, because he brings in more than he gets paid. Get that top producer a service person and pay less on renewal to keep the new business flowing and still keep the renewals. Doesn’t do any good to bring it in the front door if it’s going out the back. That will kill an agency.
Oops! There I go again showing how I don’t know how to run an agency. LOL!
when it becomes cheaper to hire a Serv Rep and an new producer is the general line. This happens in my neck of the woods constantly. In my case. my guy makes about $40,000 to manage $600,000 Premium Volume. I feel an obligation to him where as the Independent up the road would have kicked him to the curb long ago. Hired someone at $25000 – $30000 annually and increase his profit margin.
Could be what happened to you back in Colo.
And one more point Libby – It dont show that you dont know how to do it. It just shows you dont know every decision that needs to be made as that decision may have never been yours to make.
FFA, perhaps you are referring to one of those big Metro agents who terminate producers when they get to a certain level, you know like the one Libby worked for. I personally don’t know any agent in our area that does that kind of thing. That is abominable. The only producers I ever terminated were the ones that didn’t produce after training, counseling. They were young guys that thought business would just walk through the door and hand them their business. Usually, you can tell if a person will work out within 6 months if they have the guts and determination to make it. I lost money on two of them so I am not anxious to put anyone else on unless they bring a book with them and not constrained by a no compete contract.
Well, using you and Agent’s math, you are making $60,000 on that book of businss and paying the producer $40,000. That’s 2/3’s of the revenue! I’d never leave if I got that kind of deal. You’re just breaking even with a 33% expense ratio.
Most agencies I worked for paid 50% on new and 35% on renewal. The difference (15%) was used to hire service people to keep the renewals flowing. The producer had an incentive to sell new business (more money) and not just sit on his book.
Your producer will not be able to serve $600k AND keep producing, so you will be losing money on him soon. Whether he sits on his $600k or brings it in the front an loses it out the back.
But then again, what do I know? I’m just a lowly employee…
Libby – he dont add much at all to the over head here. Maybe on the phone bill and maybe on the print expense, but I would still need E & O, still have rent, still have office insurance, electric ect…. My plan has always been to dump 100% of first year into acquisition. I’ll wait till year number two to make my money. When he retires is when I will make my full boat on him. He is 63 now, so…
Getting rid of high payroll has been common in this neck of the woods as long as I have been around. No Compete Clause secures the business for me.
Yes, Libby, I put in the hours when I was an associate/producer to build my business and had over half the total volume of the agency I produced and my partner almost a third that she produced. Yes, a female agent, a concept you have not heard of. Yes, we bought the small volume of the former owner and paid him for it, but our business was what we sweated and worked for so don’t attempt to denigrate my efforts. While we were doubling the agency size, we made a number of improvements to the operation since the former agent never invested in proper technology, operating system, office machines, furnishings. It was like night and day compared to the former. He was still fairly compensated for his business and by the way, we kept the business on the books while we were growing ours. You have no concept of what it takes to own and run and agency and what we have to do. Your posts to FFA prove that.
I’ve never heard of a female agent??? I AM ONE! LOL!!!
You’re hilarious. First you don’t put in the hours and enjoy your leisure time, now you’re the hardest working man in the industry. You should get some medication for your schizephrenia.
My book alone was bigger than your whole agency, Agent. So don’t tell me I don’t know how to run an agency.
How much contingency did you earn for yourself last year Libby if you are the appointed agent? Does your boss know that you are the real agent, not him? You are nothing but a licensed CSR who has a book to service and you don’t sell on the street so quit trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
I’m not a CSR, Agent and haven’t been for about 22 years. But if it makes you feel better about yourself to call me one, go ahead. It’s an important job after all.
And I would have thought you would have known, you being the hotshot agency owner and all, that contingencies aren’t paid to individual agents. They are paid according to the agency per the contract.
And I signed the contract as the Principal Libby, not you no matter how important you think you are. Marketing Reps for companies do not allow licensed employees to sign for the agency. It is none of their business as it should be.
Wow! You actually signed an agency contract! I’m so impressed. Yawn.
I used to track contingencies for my agency per the contract, which also stated that all licensed agents of the agency (me) had to be appointed per the contract.
You say have licensed CSR’s that are not appointed. I think you’re breaking the law. I’d love to put a little bug in the Texas DOI’s ear if only I could.
I don’t know about Texas, but in Kentucky licensed agents must be appointed. That is actually a part of the agent licensing statutes.
Libby, the old days of paying a Producer 50% for new are long gone. I started at 40% new and 40% renewal. Now, we do 40% new, 35% renewal and that seems to work fine. We also have an agency code for business not assigned to a producer (house business). That pays some of the bills of the agency. The agency gets the whole thing if it is call in and easily handled. The CSR’s are all licensed and can develop some business of their own and we pay 35% new, 25% renewal to them and some of them like the extra kicker to their check and gives them a little incentive to sell.
What did you know about running an agency when you bought yours?
I had 10 years of observation of all the mistakes the prior owner made to learn how not to do it Libby. I figured if I did not repeat those mistakes, I would be allright and I was right about that. I also had some training on Agency Management to learn the nuts and bolts and Insurance Accounting, operating systems etc. I didn’t have to learn how to sell because that is what I knew how to do already. I also didn’t need a glorified CSR holding my hand that thought she knew more about how to run things. Thank God I didn’t inherit a Libby back in those days.
10 years of observation and a class? So, you had less experience than I have, yet you scoff at me. I’m sure if you could do it, Agent, anyone could.
Libby, my total experience in this business from starting out working for a company to being a producer/associate in an agency to owning an agency dwarfs your experience. Is your name counter signed on the policies you produce? Do you negotiate with the E&O carrier each year for the renewal? Do you sign the company contracts? Do you sign the payroll checks for the employees or make the decision on bonuses, remuneration? Do you sign the checks paying the agency operating bills? Do you decide how much to contribute to benefits & SEP IRA for the agency? I didn’t think so. Just because you have a license doesn’t make you “The Agent”. By the way, my carriers seem to like me just fine. We had a record year in contingency income so I guess we must be writing some profitable business for our carriers. A bad agent generally does not do well over a period of years.
Agent – I never said you were a bad agent or disparaged your success. You, on the other hand, have done nothing but insult me.
You are a small-minded, little man that needs to insult others to feel superior about himself. You’re not worth my time.
So Libby, you can insult me time after time, but when I push back, that doesn’t sit well with you. You have a tendency to insult anyone who disagrees with you on anything. You think you know more than anyone else. Who has the superior attitude here. You call FFA stupid, me small minded, Seageant & Sarah names and think we will give you a pass on all your ugly remarks. That is not going to happen.
I calls ’em as I sees ’em, Agent. Now be gone with you.
Libby, others on this forum have noticed your nasty replies and FFA said he didn’t know what is wrong with you these days and yes, you have disparaged me plenty. Go back and read some of your posts and go to the AIG article in particular and you might be amazed at some of your statements. You are mad at me because I don’t let you have your way with all your rants.
Nope. You are the one that always begins with the insults and you expect me to just sit back and take it. Well, buddy, I give as good as I get.
You and FFA started it when I mentioned, to FFA I might add – not you, that IA’s speak in terms of revenue. You two chose to argue with me and insult me in the process.
No, I’m not an agency owner. That doesn’t mean I don’t know a thing or two about the insurance business. You disparage my experience and demean me because you think you are better than me. It only makes you look like the small man that you are.
Everyone does here.
Including Myself, Ron, Agent, and you Libby.
I will commend you on the fact that you always choose to debate regardless. A strong and good trait. It’s fighting the good fight so to speak, and always keeping the other side around. As opposed to Ron, who tends to just reply to what he wants to and thinks he can win.
You’re a just fine debater, and so is Agent. Morality points and who attacks more shouldn’t be relevant…
Bob, I don’t usually start right off the bat with an insult to Agent. But after he lobs one at me, which is usually his first comment, all bets are off.
Some of the things you say come of as insulting to republicans too, he’s taking offense to that.
Such as when a republican doesn’t have an argument they crap on the chess board and do a pigeon walk. He doesn’t forget those like you don’t forget him calling democrats socialists.
Let’ all dedicate today to a calm day eh?
Bob – minor correction: the pigeon analagy is Sarah’s and is directed to, as she says, libtards.
You’ve said it with Planet in the past.
I am aware Sarah says it as well.
If it’s an excuse for you it’s an excuse for Agent. That’s my only point.
I don’t think I’ve ever used that analogy, unless in response to Sarah.
Hey, can I get in on the insults?? Do y’all want to know what analysts say about agents? Oh, I’m not supposed to share that. Well, poo. I’ll just leave you hanging, then. ;-)
Come on. You can’t keep us hanging…
Just curious, KY. What is an analyst? I’ve only heard that term used in risk management departments.
My analyst job is in compliance. I have to compare rules & forms to state laws.
I really shouldn’t have mentioned the insults, but I was feeling left out. I don’t have much contact with agents, but when I do it’s usually because something bad has happened coverage wise. Of course we all blame the agent when that happens. (tongue in cheek – it’s all in good fun)
You can live vicariously through my insults any day. I sure do sling ’em out there! LOL!
It helps my stress level.
Nice to see that you were able to have a record year in contingency income with President Obama in office. Please explain to me again how he is destroying the economy, especially yours.
I am also better off now than I was before he took office. Not that he had anything to do with my success or yours.
We have done well despite Obama Ron, not because he has done anything worthy to restore the economy. My tax bill hasn’t gone down, but up. It is too bad you can’t see the light and what this man is doing to destroy the economy and this country. Doesn’t it bother you in the least that almost half the country doesn’t pay taxes and are on some form of government assistance instead of working? Doesn’t it bother you that the government is borrowing $.40 of every dollar to pay ongoing bills? Has he proposed a balanced budget lately? Doesn’t it bother you that every proposal made is more Socialism, more Keynsian spending to add more to the debt? I guess not as long as you have your job and you think you are doing better with each passing year. I can assure you that business owners are not happy with what is going on.
Please, please, please get some help with your reading comprehension.
Did you miss the part where I stated, “Not that he had anything to do with my success or yours.”?
However, facts are facts, you said you had a record year in contingency income. That means the economy has not negatively affected your agency. You keep citing anecdotal evidence against Presidetnm Obama and ignore your own situation.
I have provided data and statistics to show that there is improvement in the economy, spending is going down and our annual deficits are going down. I have also shown that our debt is not just his fault. We have had deficit spending in all but 4 out of the past 44 years including each year President Reagan was in office.
What bothers me is that President Obama gets treated differently than every president that was in office before him even though he has not done anything different and has no more power. I do not recall any president getting so much heat with nothing to back up the fear besides rhetoric, anecdotal evidence and misinformation.
Please list all of his proposals that are Socialist and explain how they meet the definition of Socialism.
I guess it is OK for President Reagan to implement Keynesian spending principles to help an economy to recover, but not Presidetnt Obama.
The problem I have with Republicans is that they come into office, lower taxes, increase spending, and then complain about debt.
Ron: Agent will tell you the reason he did so well is all because of him. You should know that by now.
Did Good = Because of Agent
Did Bad = Because of Obama
Libby, try to sharpen up your reading skills along with Ron. I have never done bad since I have been an agency owner. I could have done even better without the arrival of the worst President in American history. Please cite some examples of what Obama has done to improve this economy. Has he helped small business owners increase their business, encouraged them to hire by reducing their tax burden? Has he disbanded the terrible EPA for their abuses to American business? Did he pass the horrible Obamacare that is causing businesses to lay off people or turn workers into part time employees?
You insinuated you would have done better if not for Obama.
I don’t need to sharpen any of my skills, Agent. You, on the other hand, need a remedial reading comprehension class. ASAP!
Hey Ron, dig out your CPCU books and see if you can figure out what “Contingency Income” is. Let me see if I can add to your education. Contingency Income is a reward from a carrier to an agent for both growth in premium volume and having a good Loss Ratio on that volume and the PIF count. An agent does not get Contingency from no growth or for a poor Loss Ratio. An agent has to have both to be rewarded by the carrier. We had a record year due to doing a good job placing good business on the books and not having many large claims to ruin the experience. No, that part of the income was not due to Obama ruining the economy. He is doing a great job at ruining the economy for business owners all across the country.
Growth in premium is a sign of a strenghening economy, Agent. In a round about way, so is a reduction in claims activity.
I do not need to dig out any book to know what contingency income is. How can you grow if the economy is going into the tank? Where is everybody coming up with the money to buy things, start businesses, and pay their premiums? Have you thanked your underwriter for helping you understand what is a good risk and making your agency profitable?
If you knew anything about underwriting and pricing, you would know that losses increase during poor economic times and decrease during good economic times.
Can you quantify how the economy is being ruined or are you just spreading more rhetoric and talking points from the right. If it is half as bad as you make it out to be, it should be easy.
So you start by mocking the CPCU in this post then continue to explain that your reward/contingency income comes from placing good business and having a good loss ratio… do you not see the irony there? Do you have any idea what an underwriter does?
LiveFree ~ :D
Hey Libby, the economy in Texas is strong and getting stronger, the rest of the country, not so much. If the economy is strengthening as you say, why do we have record numbers of people on food stamps and on a myriad of other entitlement programs? Why are millions not looking for work anymore and just falling out of the system. If they were counted, we would have a 15-20% unemployment rate. Where is the private sector jobs program to put people back to work? Why don’t you ask FFA how Illinois is doing on jobs and taxes? How about asking Sargeant how Michigan and Detroit are doing? Heavy taxation Blue States are a joke and Red States are creating jobs and are in much better shape.
We don’t have record numbers on food stamps, Agent. Where have you been? December 2013 numbers are at mid-2012 levels.
And I think FFA told us his commercial clients are increasing, limits, payrolls, and receipts and also buying additional coverage.
The stock market is going through the roof.
And yet here you sit with your head in the sand, rocking back and forth, and spouting doom and gloom. Nobody’s buying it.
Not that it matters a whit to this conversation, but my son LOVES living in Austin. I think he’s found his forever home. :)
Austin is to Texas like Miami is to Kentucky. Worlds apart. Austin is a really cool place. Not so much the rest of Texas.
I don’t know why it’s so hard for them to understand. Just dense I guess.
Oh, Libby, that’s hilarious! I think my son mentioned a distinct difference between Austin & Dallas (where he lived before). From his descriptions, it does sound like a fun place to be. Especially for his age.
Actually Ron, the reason why governments deficit spend is because of Progressives running the show. They think they can spend their way to prosperity even though the Keynes plan has been thoroughly discounted as an economic model. Progressive Democrats and RINO’s are the reason we have had deficit spending for decades. After all, it isn’t their money, it is ours they waste on every worthless program in existence. By the way, your hero LBJ took the Social Security Trust Fund and put it in the General Fund to do his War on Poverty. Has the poverty rate improved in the past 40 years? Do you know why we had a Balanced Budget during the Clinton years? Not because of Slick Willy. Newt Gingrich with the Republican House had to shut the government down until he saw the light and signed it. What a novel idea! Too bad subsequent Congresses didn’t stick to their guns or we might be in a better place now.
How is LBJ my hero? I have agreed with you in the past that his “War on Poverty” was a failure.
If Congress is the reason we have deficits and surpluses, why are you blaming President Obama for the debt? I will agree with you that we have spineless congresspeople who only want to cut the funding outside of their constituencies. However, that is not a president’s fault.
You do realize that Presidetn Clinton had to sign off on the balanced budgets, right? I was actually glad the Republicans took that stand and that is why I was voted mostly for Republicans until 2006 when they started ballooning the debt and did not address the health care problems we had.
I am going to assume that you will not be listing President Obama’s Socialist proposals. Is that because there aren’t any or because it would require you to do more than spread rhetoric and talking points from the right?
Ron, are you forgetting the Stimulus that wasn’t a Stimulus as a Socialist Proposal or even the daddy of all, Obamacare, the biggest redistribution of wealth in the nations history? Obama likes his Socialist agenda so much, he proposed another $302 Billion in his latest budget proposal for bridges and roads. I thought we had that in the original Stimulus that ended up in the hands of his supporters instead of being used to create jobs. By all means, let’s just do another government spending spree and keep on with that Socialist Keynsian approach. It has worked so well in the past 5 years.
Agent – you incorrectly equate Keynsian economics with socialism. I thought you had an economics degree.
Since when is a health plan requiring people to buy coverage through the private, independent insurance marketplace a socialist proposition?
Actually Libby, they go hand in hand and both are used by government. Both are tremendous failures. Socialism is full of mandates and Obamacare is laden with them. When you have a government telling the citizens they have to buy something or get penalized for it, that is Socialism personified.
So mandatory Auto and Workers Compensation insurance must be socialist plans as wells?
Actually Libby, we have voluntary Workers Compensation in Texas. No employer is mandated to carry it although most do. You Blue States continue to mandate and watch your businesses continue to move out.
Way to answer the question, Agent. Are they socialist programs or not?
If you could only come up with 2 proposal, neither of which is actually Socialist or proposals, you have nothing. As usual.
President Obama is not the first, and will not be last, to use a stimulus package to stimulate an economy.
Do you know who wrote this quote and to which president he was referring? “Could the president, in the economic dislocation that accompanied his anti-inflation fight, and the transition from a war to a peace-time economy, shut off spending by the world’s biggest buyer of goods and services (the US government) without risking a full scale depression.”
If you believe that economic stimulus is Socialism, you will have to inlcude some interesting people in your group of Socialists including President Reagan. Do you not recall his stimulus programs? I admit that they were far more successful than President Obama’s, which is why Reagan is still my favorite president, it was still a stimulus package.
If you have not yet guessed, those are President Reagan’s words referencing President Nixon.
Please explain, using a definition of Socialism, how either the PPACA or stumuls programs are Socialist.
Ron – you are nothing if not persistent. But Agent will not explain, with or without a definition, because he can’t. He’s just full of old, dusty, hot, republican air. He’s a windbag, nothing more.
Hey Ron, why has the government been averaging over a trillion in debt for the past 5 years? Why has he not had plans to create job growth instead of decline? Why do we have the lowest labor participation rate in 30 years? Why hasn’t he passed real incentives to business to hire like tax cuts? Why did he pass the biggest job killer in history (Obamacare)? You think he doesn’t have anything to do with that? It is amazing that you think the President doesn’t have anything to do with the trending to a Socialist Society. By the way, the Healthcare problems we had back in the day pale in comparison to what we have now. How many lost jobs will it take to convince you this was a gigantic mistake? I guess you must have believed his 39 taped promises that we could keep our Healthcare if we liked it, Period. Keep you doctor if you like him, Period. It is so good, he has put off the cancellations for another year. Wow, how gracious of him!
Since Captain Planet is the only one on this site to advocate FOR this health insurance disaster, you can stop wasting space on what the president said about the ACA. We get it. It sucks. No question. Just a thought.
Hallelujah, KY. Agent just likes to hear himself talk. Give it a rest, already.
Libby said- “If Sarge or Sarah would like my help in running their agency, I will gladly give it. For a fee.”
I have to laugh again. Libby, given your past posts on this blog, your lack of mathematical ability and business management skill, you could not run a lemonade stand.
Glad to know you won’t be needing my services, Sarge. It would have been hard to have worked with such a bigot. Thanks for letting me off the hook.
Hey Sargeant, wouldn’t you love to have a CSR telling you how to run your agency? Gee, I have learned so much in the last few weeks. I don’t know how I have done it, do you? Libby thinks she is The Agent and we are just dumb agency owners. What a deal.
I’d pit my overall knowledge against yours any day, Agent. Yours is the depth of a kiddie pool compared to mine.
Ha no I am not sure I could stand it- LOL. Why would I hire someone who spends most of her time on this blog, wasting agency time. She posts all day long looking for an argument with anyone. She gets paid to work and it is to bad the people paying her does not get her “full attention”.
When she is not blogging I am sure she is on the net trying to find something she can use and post. Like her use of the KKK website. And she calls us bigots- LOL
Second, she doesn’t even know what a partner, managing partner is with respect to business structure. Has not a clue unless she looked it up recently on Wikipedia. She proved that in on of her DUH posts.
Third, I think anyone trusting her with a balance sheet, statement of retained earnings, a tax statement, BOD presentation or relying on her to make money would have to qualify as an idiot.
Good one Sargeant. Correct me if I am wrong, but she also denigrated your military service one time and said you had too much schrapnel in your head. We know that was just sarcasm, right? She thinks she is big stuff having a license and doesn’t know the difference between being an appointed agent and a licensed agent. I think all the stuff you mentioned about balance sheets, income statements, retained earnings would be way over her head. Gee, how did we get our agency going without her help?
It wasn’t sarcasm, Agent. It was a joke. I know you fail to recognize them because you have no sense of humor. I never denegrated anyone’s military service, but you can continue to lie. You do it well.
As for you, Sarge, just when does citing your source make you a bigot?
Libby – point out one post where I have insulted you.
Calling me ADD? I’d call that an insult. Telling me I didn’t know what I didn’t know? That’s an insult. You, Agent, and Sarge all think you are superior to me because you are an agency owner. I have done most, if not all, of the jobs required to be an owner. No, I haven’t made payroll, but I have been through the budget process. I have counseled other agents on running their business as an Area Manager for a large franchise operation.
You don’t know what I know or don’t know and it’s presumptuous of you to imply that you do.
Agent calls me a glorified CSR, which he intends as an insult. I only wish his own CSR knew that’s how he felt about her. His contempt of what he considers “underlings” is glaringly blatant. As is Sarges’.
I consider you a nice guy and a friend, but you did insult me as I did you.
I asked if you are as that is the way you present. Asking a question (in my book) is not insulting. Unfortunately, I have a lot of experience with that.
Nor do I recall you insulting me.
I in no way present as ADD. I was pissed off. But I’m over it, as far as you are concerned. Not so much with Agent…
FFA, It is good you have a short memory. Libby insulted you several times on the AIG story just like she does me on a daily basis. She butted her nose in where it didn’t belong all just because you asked me if I was busy.
Not true, but keep recreating history (or lying as I like to call it.)
Agent – “It is good you have a short memory.”
Need to, I am the closer. Cant worry about yesterday. Today has presented its own challenges just like tomorrow will.
Maybe its my passive nature, my short memory, but I dont recall insults. I recall an argument, but not insults.
The insult was I told you you were wrong. Now Agent, he’s a different story. He loves to put me down every chance he gets, so I go tit for tat with him.
Lying is something you are good at Libby. FFA asked me if I was busy. I said I was and listed some things and then you went on a multi comment tirade and told him he didn’t know the difference between premium and revenue. All we were talking about were accounts we were working on and you just couldn’t leave it alone. Your boss should present you with a fence post to put in your office so you could argue with it all day. Your sarcastic, mean spirited comments are not helpful. FFA is a decent man and a good agent. Leave him alone.
Agent – I do not lie. Of that I am most proud.
FFA posted he wrote a $6,200 policy and I asked if he was using premium of commission dollars. Then, I posted to HIM – not you, that IA’s usually speak in terms of revenue.
YOU took it upon yourself to not only disagree with me, but insult and demean me. I only finished what you started.
You constantly try to rewrite history and try to make yourself look better and I won’t stand for it.
HMMMM. Always have to have the last word.
Yes, especially if the ones before me were incorrect. I won’t let Agent lie and not correct him.
See what I mean FFA about Libby? She has to interject herself into everything on this blog and then try to prove how smart she is and how dumb us agents are. We don’t even speak the same language she does and that proves she is not an agent, but just a know it all CSR. Then, she gets really mean and denigrates agents if they have had success. That is what Progressives do. They are envious of anyone who has worked hard, made a success of their business and lives and somehow think it is fine to try to bring us down. It doesn’t work but they keep trying, her and Ron.
Please quote 1 line from any of the comments Libby or I have posted that have denigrated your success or indicated any level of envy.
Yes, we have put you down for being an ignorant, misinformed, closed-minded, greedy, self-promoting pompous ass who has no respect for anyone in the insurance industry that is not an agency owner. However, we never said anything about your success outside of saying, “good for you”.
Libby Says : “The insult was I told you you were wrong”
I guess we define insults differently. Questions the method to my madness is not insulting to me.
HMMM. Always on the defense.
Good one agent. Butting in to conversations. Another personality trait of someone that has …..
Well Ron, you proved you can be just as insulting as Libby. It took you a while to get there, but you have the new insulting award for 2014. Congratulations. Libby will be disappointed because she is the defending champion and thought she was the Queen of Insults. I guess you can jointly share the award as the King & Queen. By the way, I do know a lot of good people in the Industry, just not you and Libby and hope to never meet you in person or there will be big trouble.
As soon as you apologize for all of the times you incorrectly labled me as a Liberal, Progressive, or Democrat, I will apologize for labeling you how I see you solely based on comments posted on IJ.
So, you could not quote 1 line from Libby or I where either one of us have denigrated your success or indicated any level of envy.
HMMM. Continues to insult. A sure sign of an …
FFA, Libby & Company try to defend their liberal leanings and when they don’t win an argument, they attack and call us Conservatives stupid. Ron agrees with you and then in the next sentence disagrees with you. That comes with being a two faced Independent.
FFA, you don’t have to stand for some Progressive woman ala Libby calling you stupid. You admitted to making some mistakes thinking you could sell Obamacare and the expense and heartache that was the result. You actually thought you could make a buck on it and was lied to by this President. You admitted your error in judgment and they still let you have it. FFA, you are sometimes too nice for your own good.
Well, agent, too many years of telemarketing… Taking that daily abuse has hardened my skin.
Daily abuse? I give you daily abuse? You know that’s not true, FFA.
You, Agent, you will always get daily abuse from me. Quit deflecting on to FFA.
I was referring to my telemarketing days. Not what goes on here.
So it is OK to call me a bigot or make the don’t ask don’t tell comment or tell me I should hire you (LOL) but when you get it back you cry foul?
You start it, your going to get it. Besides that I tell the truth-LOL
You are a bigot, Sarge.
Your the bigot as well as a liar. Your the one that surfs KKK websites and you don’t even know if I am white or black. So I grew up in Detroit. Libby, am I white or black? Remember, 90 percent of the people in Detroit are black. Your the one who has made more racist remarks than anyone on here.
You’re crazy. I don’t CARE if you’re black or white. I used the KKK link to cite my source in response to a remark you made about black KKK members. It was a simple google search, that’s all.
You’re the one that refers to the SSD office as “the Mexican Village” and many other choice bigoted statements you have made against ethnics and minorities.
I know you’d like to twist things around, but the truth will out. Not that you’d know the truth if you tripped over it.
How come you keep changing the way you spell your name, Sargent Major?
And I challenge you to state one thing I have lied about. You continue to defame me by calling me a liar when I have not lied about anything. You are bigoted bully and nothing more.
Libby, liar on high, it was your source and you are the first to curse, denigrate and mock. Then when you get hammered, which is easy to do you try and blame someone else. I guess you don’t recall apologizing to me for comments you made because you are now denying you ever made them. You are just like Obama.
I know you and Agent like to rewrite history, but if you’ll recall the TRUTH, you made one of your outrageous comments and I remarked “Did you take too much shrapnel to the head?” Hardly denegrating your service. Get over it crybaby.
My apology was meant as an olive branch since you obviously had your little feelings hurt. Big mistake that will NEVER happen again.
Hey Sargeant, remember when you posted your famous Youtube videos highlighting all the lies by the Democrats from their own lips and Libby made the excuse that she didn’t have sound on her computer to listen to them. What she was really saying was that she didn’t want her boss to know that she was trolling on IJ. Any hard drive worth its salt has sound on it. She really didn’t want to hear her own leaders lies since that doesn’t fit her mantra.
Yes, I remember. She said she could not hear them because she did not have sound. Then about a month later I posted another ( for Ron give me data) and she commented on the video. Gee I thought she did not have sound. LOL
I also recall her saying she did not watch cable news and then some time later commenting on cable news articles. She tells so many whoppers I am beginning to think the only time she lies is when she uses a computer. LOL!!
I’m just going to but in because I can.
On the computer sound thing – Libby specifically said she WATCHED the video and figured out what it was about.
On the news thing – you do realize that most of the web sites for the various news/media channels carry the same articles as what was shown on tv, right? That’s how I get my news. I look at the various websites when I feel like it. I don’t watch the news on tv.
So, in the two instances you’ve given, Libby didn’t lie.
Thanks, KY. I get tired of correcting these two guys all the time. They make up stories as they go along and then call ME the liar. I know I don’t lie. But I know who does…
Seargeant, since we know that Libby is The Agent, she should just cut a check for a new computer that has sound so she can hear videos that are sent to her. I wonder what she does when a company has a webinar with sound. Does she just not participate because of her computer’s shortcomings?
Actually Kyjw, she did lie to Sergeant that she didn’t have sound on her computer. She just wanted to put Sargeant down and obviously didn’t want to acknowledge all the lies Democrats were saying right from their own lips.
I DID NOT LIE. I DO NOT HAVE SOUND ON MY WORK COMPUTER. IT LACKS SPEAKERS, YOU MORON.
AGENT – READ THIS:
Libby *WATCHED* the video. In no way did I mean she had sound. Why, why, WHY do you not understand?
Sorry to break up the beautiful discourse here, but I figured I’d attach something to put things a little more in perspective. It’s not relevant at all to the current discussion, but maybe that’s a good thing. Some of you may remember that I unfortunately posted something very similar to this a few months ago:
“William “Wild Bill” Guarnere of South Philadelph