This ia a bunch of crap. You get a couple of the really big players pulling illegal and unethical tricks and who is really going to suffer but the small agency who has been ethical. Those contigency fees, representing payment for stability of books and low loss ratios (equating to profitability for the carrier), are an important part of their income. With those contingencies gone, the insurance companies will realize greater profit and the big brokers (who caused all of this) will find other ways to bolster their income, like dropping a lot of their smaller business and imposing fees on those huge customers.
Once again the little guy gets it in the shorts and the big guys just keep on raking in the cash.
Dems take control the small business gets whacked. Why doesnt Dicky B go after some of his lawyer buddies with all they get away with. The Big I, PIA, and Trusted Choice better get there Big guns out and fight like hell…or kiss my dues good bye. Who else gets their income legislated out! Why doesnt Dickie B tell the Insurance Co CEOs not to take any more bonus money? Is that Contingency money? This is truly unbelievable.
Contingency is what the quality agency works for at year end. If Connecticut wants to play this game they better look at 2 additional areas. 1) the future of agency system in state will disappear and direct writers will be only choice. 2)If you are going to attack the backbone of Amercian Sales you better apply these rules to all salespeople (auto, retail stores, or should I say 90% of the people we deal with). Goodbye middle class!
In states like Conn, Calif, Ill negotiations won\’t help. It has to be handled in the courts. This whole thing should have been settled by the courts. Then it would have come down to what we all already knew. Bid rigging bad continent not bad. But this industry runs like hell when you say \”court\”. How long were countersignature fees paid in states like florida until it went to the state supreme court and were the fees were halted. Our industry leaders want to handle this on the golf course. But you have politicaly motiveted people driving this and only the courts can stop it. This type of legislation has nothin gto do with busines or ethics it\’s POLITICS. Go to court we can\’t loose. If they say stop so what the state is already saying it. If they say it\’s ok then we win. Laws do not operate in a vacumn they affect everything they touch. State supreme courts will have to really think on this one as a decission to ban will affect all busines not just insurance. How much you want to bet our industry does not fight this where it matters in the court. There are so many insurance regs that would be kicked at State supreme or fed level it\’s not funny. Yes fed it may be insurance but federal commercial codes apply as well.
The problem originated from the fact that large Brokers were representing their clients as brokers. Their clients engaged them to purchase coverage and paid them to do so. However, without the knowledge of the client, the Broker received contingent commissions from the insurance companies for placing the business with them. What sense does it make to ban contingent commissions for agents, who represent their insurance companies as agents, and are paid by their insurance companies and not paid by the consumer. Legally an agent represents his insurance company, he is not representing the client.
Its really got nothing to do with human nature. If our system reflected human nature every CEO and Bill Gates out there would have been lynched a long time ago for taking excessive profit. Logically why would mob rule allow one smart nerd to have SO MUCH more than the rest of us?? Its not gods system, its a system created by greedy humans and it favors rich people. We only have a modified version of capitalism in the US anyway because we found capitalism to be too brutal, it just didnt work. Remember in true capitalism there is no FDA, FAA, and monopolies are legal.
It\’s got EVERYTHING to do with human nature. Demo\’s want and advocate Socialism, which by it\’s very nature, goes against human nature , which is why it has never worked and will never work.
Further, there\’s no PURE anything, I was speaking realistically not figuratively from out of a book.
What\’s with the duplicate name?
Good point. I agree. However, is that still true. Does your state still have a broker\’s license or just \”Producer\” How can you apply differing rules for agents and brokers when the state doesn\’t even use the term. Does each state have written description of when an individual is a broker or agent. If you hold a brokers license are you always a broker? If yes can I have a copy of that. If not can I have a copy of when I\’m an agent and when I\’m a Broker, other then broker represents the insured which is on the old agents exam.
Politically motivated insurance commissioner will hammer us. Even if we loose in the courts will be no worse off and can only do better.
A big part of what Spitzer said and I\’m not a fan, was your industry is a mess you need to fix and clarify. It the main reason why he didn\’t go to criminal court. The state laws are a MESS, unclear, undefined. The agent/broker community needs to have the states define agent and broker. Of course the states look stupid since the change to producer is new and really confused the works. I could go on but I hope you get my point.
My state (PA) now only has a producer license. However, regarding personal lines, our agency does not enter into written or oral contracts with the consumer to represent said consumer only. We have written AGENCY contracts with our personal lines carriers. These contracts state very clearly that we are acting as an agent for the company.
A fellow Pennsylvania….As I said I agree with you. Our agency has both agency contracts agent and \”Broker\” contracts. Some of our contracts that say broker right on the contract pay commission from the company we do not charge a fee. My point is that the agent/Broker associations need to chalenge these laws in the courts. If we feel we are like any other sales operation then take it to court becuase if we leave it to making deals with the state commssioners say good bye to everything but straight commission and we will live with showing every client all our income. I never thought I\’d say it but the courts are the way to fight this. Then again that\’s what they\’re for.
On another point, straight commission will be better than commission & PS. Companies will be forced to pay the PS expense to us in the form of guaranteed commission if they want to remain in the personal lines side.
I\’m always shocked at some of the stupidity that exists. I\’m referring to the Demo that copied your name at posting time of 2:51. Proof of your statement \”Demos Against Capitalism\” is in clear display. Unfortunately most Demos never heard of Adam Smith and have no basic understanding of economics.
Tony what specific comment was so \”stupid?\” Everything I said is accurate. So I guess you are stupid then right?
ALso, I thought the discussion revolved around human nature as much as economics.
Let me ask you a question, if \”society\” was 100 people living on a deserted Island, would we decide on Capitalism or Socialism. Also, do you believe in evolution? Can human nature evolve? Are there any other things in society that motivate people besides money? What football player do you like the most, the one who is motivated by money, or the one who is motivated to work hard for the team out of a sense of pride and loyalty? In fact that pride and loyalty might even stem from an intelligent rational understanding of how a team must operate.
Also, why is it true that most intellectuals are either Democrats, Greens, or Independents?
Something to think about Republicans – Why do you think you all got voted out of office? The Republican party will cease to exist in the near future if it only panders to spacial interests, the corporations, and only consists of rich white men named \”fat tony\”.
Why copy someone else\’s name in such a simple forum? Does you pea brain and shallow gene pool limit your ability to interact normally?
Sounds like you\’re happy and smug stewing in your own rancid juices like most loser types but please check your facts in the future ,for your own self respect. Maybe you can get some one day.
What facts are you referring to? Be specific and bring it. Everything I said is factually acurate. What dont you understand?
Support for the free market as an ordering principle of society is above all associated with liberalism, especially during the 19th century. (In Europe, the term \’liberalism\’ retains its connotation as the ideology of the free market, but in American usage it came to be associated with government intervention, and acquired a pejorative meaning for supporters of the free market.) Later ideological developments, such as minarchism and libertarianism also support the free market, and insist on its pure form. Although the Western world shares a generally similar form of economy, usage in the United States is to refer to this as capitalism, while in Europe \’free market\’ is the preferred neutral term.Marxism, communism, and socialism are usually seen as the main ideological opponents of the free market. Modern liberalism (American usage), and in Europe social democracy, seek only to mitigate what they see as the problems of an unrestrained free market, and accept its existence as such. To most libertarians, there is simply no free market yet, given the degree of state intervention in even the most \’capitalist\’ of countries. From their perspective, those who say they favor a \”free market\” are speaking in a relative, rather than an absolute, sense — meaning (in libertarian terms) they wish that coercion be kept to the minimum that is necessary to maximize economic freedom (such necessary coercion would be taxation, for example) and to maximize market efficiency by lowering trade barriers, making the tax system neutral in its influence on important decisions such as how to raise capital, e.g., eliminating the double tax on dividends so that equity financing is not at a disadvantage vis\’a\’vis debt financing. However, there are some such as anarcho-capitalists who would not even allow for taxation and governments, instead preferring protectors of economic freedom in the form of private contractors.The ethical justification of free markets takes two forms. One appeals to the intrinsic moral superiority of autonomy and freedom (in the market), see deontology. The other is a form of consequentialism – a belief that decentralised planning by a multitude of individuals making free economic decisions produces better results in regard to a more organized, efficient, and productive economy, than does a centrally-planned economy where a central agency decides what is produced, and allocates goods by non-price mechanisms. An older version of this argument is the metaphor of the Invisible Hand, familiar from the work of Adam Smith, although it is older. In Smith\’s time there were no centrally planned economies to serve as a comparison to the extent they existed in the 20th century, he was simply arguing that the market benefits the common good. Modern theories of self-organization say the internal organization of a system can increase automatically without being guided or managed by an outside source. When applied to the market, as an ethical justification, these theories appeal to its intrinsic value as a self-organising entity. Other philosophies such as some forms of Individualist anarchism and Mutualism (economic theory) anarchism believe that a truly \”free market\” would result in prices paid for goods and services to align with the labor embodied in those things.
I hate to bust your bubble but it is not true most intellectuals are Democrats, Greens or Independents. The following is a fact that can be backed by proof: Most Democrats have a high school education while most Republicans college. Regarding special interests your Democrat Party is controlled by: Unions, Trial Lawyers, Gays, Feminists, Enviromentalists, PETA, and I could continue. I suggest you do some serious reading before making more of a fool of yourself.
I have read your plagiarized commentary. Please learn from it. Hopefully you will come to the realization that, to date, the free market has outperformed all centralized planned economies.
I made a gaffe regarding the Democrat vs Republican educational survey that was completed a few years ago. The following is how it should have read: The average Democrat has some high school education and the average Republican has some college education.
When did I say I was a Democrat? They are controlled by special interests just like the Reps. Im in the Green party, what can you say about them? Why shouldnt rich people pay more in taxes? Is that socialism? Its a pretty brilliant system they have fooled you with when an average guy like fat Tony is defending the rights of billionaires to not pay taxes. You are a fool. They are laughing at you fat boy. If poor people and rich people paid the same amount in taxes you wouldnt even be able to pay for your Iraq war.
Wake up an educate yourself! ONLY THE RICH PAY TAXES, YOU JERK. The top 50% pay 96.54% of all income taxes and the top 1% pay more than a third: 34.27%!!!
You are a morose individual, as most are on the left. I have more important things to do than descend into your bucket of depression.
When agents were told to expect contingencies to be eliminated…
We are already seeing contingencies being eliminated and commissions increased. If all agents are treated the same, what is the franchise value? You will find that the smaller producers will be terminated, \”Our franchise value is that you have one\”. As always, we agents will adapt, but will the smaller and medium buyer be better served? I doubt it.
Now as to tony and his tax information as to who pays – yes the higher erners pay most of the taxes, but as a percentage of wealth, the top 5% do not come close to paying a fair share and your not a socilist if you believe in fairness.
Here in NY state (home to Eliot Spitzer and the big brokers who started this whole mess) we can have an AGENTS or a BROKERS license, or both. We can charge a service fee only if we are acting as a broker, not as an agent for a company we contractually represent.
Sometimes I act as an agent and sometimes as a broker. Tomorrow I will be charging a client a broker\’s fee. Next spring I hope to get a contingency check from a company for which I am an AGENT.
Clearly a waste of time.
What makes them think that agents won\’t demand higher commissions from the carriers that will not pay contingent commissions?
Contingent commissions make up a good portion of an agency\’s income and in some cases could put an agency in the red without this income.
Are they also going to shut down hot dog vendors that give their business to a specific hot dog maker becasue of lower pricing and better quality???
This ia a bunch of crap. You get a couple of the really big players pulling illegal and unethical tricks and who is really going to suffer but the small agency who has been ethical. Those contigency fees, representing payment for stability of books and low loss ratios (equating to profitability for the carrier), are an important part of their income. With those contingencies gone, the insurance companies will realize greater profit and the big brokers (who caused all of this) will find other ways to bolster their income, like dropping a lot of their smaller business and imposing fees on those huge customers.
Once again the little guy gets it in the shorts and the big guys just keep on raking in the cash.
Dems take control the small business gets whacked. Why doesnt Dicky B go after some of his lawyer buddies with all they get away with. The Big I, PIA, and Trusted Choice better get there Big guns out and fight like hell…or kiss my dues good bye. Who else gets their income legislated out! Why doesnt Dickie B tell the Insurance Co CEOs not to take any more bonus money? Is that Contingency money? This is truly unbelievable.
Contingency is what the quality agency works for at year end. If Connecticut wants to play this game they better look at 2 additional areas. 1) the future of agency system in state will disappear and direct writers will be only choice. 2)If you are going to attack the backbone of Amercian Sales you better apply these rules to all salespeople (auto, retail stores, or should I say 90% of the people we deal with). Goodbye middle class!
Here go the Demo\’s taking away incentives and going against human nature by rewarding mediocrity.
This is not what makes our Country great.
Contact the PIA and Big-I.
In states like Conn, Calif, Ill negotiations won\’t help. It has to be handled in the courts. This whole thing should have been settled by the courts. Then it would have come down to what we all already knew. Bid rigging bad continent not bad. But this industry runs like hell when you say \”court\”. How long were countersignature fees paid in states like florida until it went to the state supreme court and were the fees were halted. Our industry leaders want to handle this on the golf course. But you have politicaly motiveted people driving this and only the courts can stop it. This type of legislation has nothin gto do with busines or ethics it\’s POLITICS. Go to court we can\’t loose. If they say stop so what the state is already saying it. If they say it\’s ok then we win. Laws do not operate in a vacumn they affect everything they touch. State supreme courts will have to really think on this one as a decission to ban will affect all busines not just insurance. How much you want to bet our industry does not fight this where it matters in the court. There are so many insurance regs that would be kicked at State supreme or fed level it\’s not funny. Yes fed it may be insurance but federal commercial codes apply as well.
The problem originated from the fact that large Brokers were representing their clients as brokers. Their clients engaged them to purchase coverage and paid them to do so. However, without the knowledge of the client, the Broker received contingent commissions from the insurance companies for placing the business with them. What sense does it make to ban contingent commissions for agents, who represent their insurance companies as agents, and are paid by their insurance companies and not paid by the consumer. Legally an agent represents his insurance company, he is not representing the client.
Its really got nothing to do with human nature. If our system reflected human nature every CEO and Bill Gates out there would have been lynched a long time ago for taking excessive profit. Logically why would mob rule allow one smart nerd to have SO MUCH more than the rest of us?? Its not gods system, its a system created by greedy humans and it favors rich people. We only have a modified version of capitalism in the US anyway because we found capitalism to be too brutal, it just didnt work. Remember in true capitalism there is no FDA, FAA, and monopolies are legal.
It\’s got EVERYTHING to do with human nature. Demo\’s want and advocate Socialism, which by it\’s very nature, goes against human nature , which is why it has never worked and will never work.
Further, there\’s no PURE anything, I was speaking realistically not figuratively from out of a book.
What\’s with the duplicate name?
Good point. I agree. However, is that still true. Does your state still have a broker\’s license or just \”Producer\” How can you apply differing rules for agents and brokers when the state doesn\’t even use the term. Does each state have written description of when an individual is a broker or agent. If you hold a brokers license are you always a broker? If yes can I have a copy of that. If not can I have a copy of when I\’m an agent and when I\’m a Broker, other then broker represents the insured which is on the old agents exam.
Politically motivated insurance commissioner will hammer us. Even if we loose in the courts will be no worse off and can only do better.
A big part of what Spitzer said and I\’m not a fan, was your industry is a mess you need to fix and clarify. It the main reason why he didn\’t go to criminal court. The state laws are a MESS, unclear, undefined. The agent/broker community needs to have the states define agent and broker. Of course the states look stupid since the change to producer is new and really confused the works. I could go on but I hope you get my point.
My state (PA) now only has a producer license. However, regarding personal lines, our agency does not enter into written or oral contracts with the consumer to represent said consumer only. We have written AGENCY contracts with our personal lines carriers. These contracts state very clearly that we are acting as an agent for the company.
A fellow Pennsylvania….As I said I agree with you. Our agency has both agency contracts agent and \”Broker\” contracts. Some of our contracts that say broker right on the contract pay commission from the company we do not charge a fee. My point is that the agent/Broker associations need to chalenge these laws in the courts. If we feel we are like any other sales operation then take it to court becuase if we leave it to making deals with the state commssioners say good bye to everything but straight commission and we will live with showing every client all our income. I never thought I\’d say it but the courts are the way to fight this. Then again that\’s what they\’re for.
I agree.
On another point, straight commission will be better than commission & PS. Companies will be forced to pay the PS expense to us in the form of guaranteed commission if they want to remain in the personal lines side.
I\’m always shocked at some of the stupidity that exists. I\’m referring to the Demo that copied your name at posting time of 2:51. Proof of your statement \”Demos Against Capitalism\” is in clear display. Unfortunately most Demos never heard of Adam Smith and have no basic understanding of economics.
Tony what specific comment was so \”stupid?\” Everything I said is accurate. So I guess you are stupid then right?
ALso, I thought the discussion revolved around human nature as much as economics.
Let me ask you a question, if \”society\” was 100 people living on a deserted Island, would we decide on Capitalism or Socialism. Also, do you believe in evolution? Can human nature evolve? Are there any other things in society that motivate people besides money? What football player do you like the most, the one who is motivated by money, or the one who is motivated to work hard for the team out of a sense of pride and loyalty? In fact that pride and loyalty might even stem from an intelligent rational understanding of how a team must operate.
Also, why is it true that most intellectuals are either Democrats, Greens, or Independents?
Something to think about Republicans – Why do you think you all got voted out of office? The Republican party will cease to exist in the near future if it only panders to spacial interests, the corporations, and only consists of rich white men named \”fat tony\”.
Oh my god, did you hear about this?
http://axiomsun.com/home/video/leaked_fox_memo_shows_how_they_slant_the_news.html
Why copy someone else\’s name in such a simple forum? Does you pea brain and shallow gene pool limit your ability to interact normally?
Sounds like you\’re happy and smug stewing in your own rancid juices like most loser types but please check your facts in the future ,for your own self respect. Maybe you can get some one day.
What facts are you referring to? Be specific and bring it. Everything I said is factually acurate. What dont you understand?
Support for the free market as an ordering principle of society is above all associated with liberalism, especially during the 19th century. (In Europe, the term \’liberalism\’ retains its connotation as the ideology of the free market, but in American usage it came to be associated with government intervention, and acquired a pejorative meaning for supporters of the free market.) Later ideological developments, such as minarchism and libertarianism also support the free market, and insist on its pure form. Although the Western world shares a generally similar form of economy, usage in the United States is to refer to this as capitalism, while in Europe \’free market\’ is the preferred neutral term.Marxism, communism, and socialism are usually seen as the main ideological opponents of the free market. Modern liberalism (American usage), and in Europe social democracy, seek only to mitigate what they see as the problems of an unrestrained free market, and accept its existence as such. To most libertarians, there is simply no free market yet, given the degree of state intervention in even the most \’capitalist\’ of countries. From their perspective, those who say they favor a \”free market\” are speaking in a relative, rather than an absolute, sense — meaning (in libertarian terms) they wish that coercion be kept to the minimum that is necessary to maximize economic freedom (such necessary coercion would be taxation, for example) and to maximize market efficiency by lowering trade barriers, making the tax system neutral in its influence on important decisions such as how to raise capital, e.g., eliminating the double tax on dividends so that equity financing is not at a disadvantage vis\’a\’vis debt financing. However, there are some such as anarcho-capitalists who would not even allow for taxation and governments, instead preferring protectors of economic freedom in the form of private contractors.The ethical justification of free markets takes two forms. One appeals to the intrinsic moral superiority of autonomy and freedom (in the market), see deontology. The other is a form of consequentialism – a belief that decentralised planning by a multitude of individuals making free economic decisions produces better results in regard to a more organized, efficient, and productive economy, than does a centrally-planned economy where a central agency decides what is produced, and allocates goods by non-price mechanisms. An older version of this argument is the metaphor of the Invisible Hand, familiar from the work of Adam Smith, although it is older. In Smith\’s time there were no centrally planned economies to serve as a comparison to the extent they existed in the 20th century, he was simply arguing that the market benefits the common good. Modern theories of self-organization say the internal organization of a system can increase automatically without being guided or managed by an outside source. When applied to the market, as an ethical justification, these theories appeal to its intrinsic value as a self-organising entity. Other philosophies such as some forms of Individualist anarchism and Mutualism (economic theory) anarchism believe that a truly \”free market\” would result in prices paid for goods and services to align with the labor embodied in those things.
I hate to bust your bubble but it is not true most intellectuals are Democrats, Greens or Independents. The following is a fact that can be backed by proof: Most Democrats have a high school education while most Republicans college. Regarding special interests your Democrat Party is controlled by: Unions, Trial Lawyers, Gays, Feminists, Enviromentalists, PETA, and I could continue. I suggest you do some serious reading before making more of a fool of yourself.
I have read your plagiarized commentary. Please learn from it. Hopefully you will come to the realization that, to date, the free market has outperformed all centralized planned economies.
Try to enjoy life, you\’ll live longer.
I made a gaffe regarding the Democrat vs Republican educational survey that was completed a few years ago. The following is how it should have read: The average Democrat has some high school education and the average Republican has some college education.
When did I say I was a Democrat? They are controlled by special interests just like the Reps. Im in the Green party, what can you say about them? Why shouldnt rich people pay more in taxes? Is that socialism? Its a pretty brilliant system they have fooled you with when an average guy like fat Tony is defending the rights of billionaires to not pay taxes. You are a fool. They are laughing at you fat boy. If poor people and rich people paid the same amount in taxes you wouldnt even be able to pay for your Iraq war.
Wake up an educate yourself! ONLY THE RICH PAY TAXES, YOU JERK. The top 50% pay 96.54% of all income taxes and the top 1% pay more than a third: 34.27%!!!
You are a morose individual, as most are on the left. I have more important things to do than descend into your bucket of depression.
Good bye!
When agents were told to expect contingencies to be eliminated…
We are already seeing contingencies being eliminated and commissions increased. If all agents are treated the same, what is the franchise value? You will find that the smaller producers will be terminated, \”Our franchise value is that you have one\”. As always, we agents will adapt, but will the smaller and medium buyer be better served? I doubt it.
Now as to tony and his tax information as to who pays – yes the higher erners pay most of the taxes, but as a percentage of wealth, the top 5% do not come close to paying a fair share and your not a socilist if you believe in fairness.
Here in NY state (home to Eliot Spitzer and the big brokers who started this whole mess) we can have an AGENTS or a BROKERS license, or both. We can charge a service fee only if we are acting as a broker, not as an agent for a company we contractually represent.
Sometimes I act as an agent and sometimes as a broker. Tomorrow I will be charging a client a broker\’s fee. Next spring I hope to get a contingency check from a company for which I am an AGENT.