This signals more motion to the “left” by Allstate. They are one of the advocates of national catastrophe insurance, supporters of the flood/wind combination and have dabbled in consulting on a universal health care system for the US. This is a dangerous situation as Allstate has a huge market reach and political clout, particularly in the Chicago area where they are headquartered. It is a disquieting sign when a major US private corporation is mroe interested in socialist policies than the free market. PCI is very consistent in their policy positions: free market, limited government interference, open and competitive insuranc environments. Here is a small sample from PCI’s website in response to the call for national catastrophe insurance: “Expand Private Sector Capacity
Greater market freedom — Free markets encourage the entry of new capital and pricing and coverage terms send vital signals about the realistic cost of insuring against catastrophes and the most efficient means to accumulate assets to fund these exposures.”
That Allstate is rejecting that philosophy is very disturbing.
Allstate is hardly the only company to withdraw from PCI. Just the latest. If the goals of the group disagree with the goals of the company, however bad you think those goals may be, the company should not be a part of that group. Makes perfect sense to me.
Seems like big news when a founding member drops out. I wonder what the underlying reason is. This will be interesting to follow. http://www.phoenix-life-insurance.com
Seems to me that the goals of the group match pretty well what reality for a private insurance carrier should be all about. Dropping out of the group means reinventing a reality for Allstate. And that reality is “we have 30% of the homeonwers and auto business in the US, we don’t want to lose it but we don’t want to pay the claims for catastrophes so let’s have the government handle that messy part”. Reality reset-for lots of people socialism is “sexy” again, even corporate players (universal health care, government cat bondss, residual markets, national flood and windstorm funds, etc.) all seem to be popular (but wrong).
My company dropped out a year or two ago for reasons that I don’t recall. Nothing to do with any of your list as far as I remember. This group does not always represent the goals of every company. If they don’t, the company has the right to pull out. I see no problem with that. Let’s not always be so quick to convict companies of wrongdoing every time they make a business decision.
This signals more motion to the “left” by Allstate. They are one of the advocates of national catastrophe insurance, supporters of the flood/wind combination and have dabbled in consulting on a universal health care system for the US. This is a dangerous situation as Allstate has a huge market reach and political clout, particularly in the Chicago area where they are headquartered. It is a disquieting sign when a major US private corporation is mroe interested in socialist policies than the free market. PCI is very consistent in their policy positions: free market, limited government interference, open and competitive insuranc environments. Here is a small sample from PCI’s website in response to the call for national catastrophe insurance: “Expand Private Sector Capacity
Greater market freedom — Free markets encourage the entry of new capital and pricing and coverage terms send vital signals about the realistic cost of insuring against catastrophes and the most efficient means to accumulate assets to fund these exposures.”
That Allstate is rejecting that philosophy is very disturbing.
Allstate is hardly the only company to withdraw from PCI. Just the latest. If the goals of the group disagree with the goals of the company, however bad you think those goals may be, the company should not be a part of that group. Makes perfect sense to me.
Seems like big news when a founding member drops out. I wonder what the underlying reason is. This will be interesting to follow. http://www.phoenix-life-insurance.com
Seems to me that the goals of the group match pretty well what reality for a private insurance carrier should be all about. Dropping out of the group means reinventing a reality for Allstate. And that reality is “we have 30% of the homeonwers and auto business in the US, we don’t want to lose it but we don’t want to pay the claims for catastrophes so let’s have the government handle that messy part”. Reality reset-for lots of people socialism is “sexy” again, even corporate players (universal health care, government cat bondss, residual markets, national flood and windstorm funds, etc.) all seem to be popular (but wrong).
My company dropped out a year or two ago for reasons that I don’t recall. Nothing to do with any of your list as far as I remember. This group does not always represent the goals of every company. If they don’t, the company has the right to pull out. I see no problem with that. Let’s not always be so quick to convict companies of wrongdoing every time they make a business decision.