Oklahoma Schools Destroyed by Tornado Lacked ‘Safe Rooms’
Connecticut Court Rules That Lawyers Can’t Be Sued for Fraud
Wage and Hour Claims Among Top Threats to U.S. Employers
Cyber Attacks On Banks More Serious Than Public Realizes
E&O Insights: Restaurant and Tavern Risks
CEA’s First CIO Reflects C-Suite Trend
Golf and Country Clubs Weather the Storm
Midwest AGs Go After Storm-Chasing Roofing CompaniesFree Newsletters
Sign up to receive insurance news alerts!Most Popular
Current Issue
Editors and Contributors
-
Andrea WellsAgency Compensation Playbook: 2013 Agency Salary Survey -
Andrew G. SimpsonHow Process Improvement Drives Agency Profitability -
Stephanie JonesThe Acquisition Cycle -
Don JerglerIndustry Predictions -
Chris BurandReasonable Compensation -
Andrea WellsPersonal Lines: How Technology is Changing the Way Agents Do Business
I always get confused when state politicians solicit help from the Federal Gov’t. On one hand I hear state politicians complain and “states rights” and keeping the Feds out of their business and then you see this type of legislation that asks for Federal programs. I am not sure the good people of Arizona want to pay for our hurricane losses.
Remember, most of them are lawyer. It’s their nature to seek out the deepest pocket regardless of accountability.
If we had a $100 cat fund assessment added to each policies, that’s about $4 billion in revenue. If we went another 7 years without a major event, that’s $28 billion (assuming no investment income) in claims paying ability for the Cat fund in addition to the 7 billion they have. Plenty for even the worst event. Unfortunately no politician would risk charging the people less than $10 per month to make a bad system good.
Easy solution (that won’t happen)…..charge premiums that reflect the actual risk.