1 Small example of Government Regulation fucking a little guy....Me!

[uscitizen]

I personally know a guy who owned a roofing company, burned down a commercial building.
Did not have enough ins and filed bankruptcy.

 

[uscitizen]

So if you ruined someone's house and all their belongings, it's their fault? Not sure I understand.

It appears to be the governments fault somehow?

Seems like this is one of the few laws actually designed to protect the consumer.

 

[Full-Auto]

I personally know a guy who owned a roofing company, burned down a commercial building.
Did not have enough ins and filed bankruptcy.

MANY OF THE ROOFERS I USE DO NOT CARRY INSURANCE FOR TORCH DOWN.

Too expensive. I wonder if Michigan gives them that option?

 

[mudwhistle]

whats up with that?

I think it means he could give a flying-f about his problems.

People shouldn't be starting businesses anyway. Just take your check and STFU.

 

[parkinson1963]

One word Lawyers.

A few years ago a roofer caused a fire or flooding, lawyer sues for 1.5 million for lost of home/goods and pain and suffering. Poof all roofers must now carry 1.5 million coverage.

Want someone to blame, blame lawyers, the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

 

[mudwhistle]

So if you ruined someone's house and all their belongings, it's their fault? Not sure I understand.

It appears to be the governments fault somehow?

Seems like this is one of the few laws actually designed to protect the consumer.

Actually it's designed to force small-business owners out of business.

Picking winners and losers.

Crony Economics.

When you never work on a home that costs $1.5 mil what's the point of carrying that amount of insurance other then to make sure a lawyer gets a big paycheck collecting punitive damages in a lawsuit.

 

[mudwhistle]

One word Lawyers.

A few years ago a roofer caused a fire or flooding, lawyer sues for 1.5 million for lost of home/goods and pain and suffering. Poof all roofers must now carry 1.5 million coverage.

Want someone to blame, blame lawyers, the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Who's been taking huge donations from law firms to stop tort reform?

Democraps.

 

[Cuyo]

So if you ruined someone's house and all their belongings, it's their fault? Not sure I understand.

It appears to be the governments fault somehow?

Seems like this is one of the few laws actually designed to protect the consumer.

Actually it's designed to force small-business owners out of business.

Picking winners and losers.

Crony Economics.

When you never work on a home that costs $1.5 mil what's the point of carrying that amount of insurance other then to make sure a lawyer gets a big paycheck collecting punitive damages in a lawsuit.

If that were the case, why in god's name would the insurance carrier be complicit in this little plot?

Not everything's a conspiracy guys.

 

[Trajan]

It appears to be the governments fault somehow?

Seems like this is one of the few laws actually designed to protect the consumer.

Actually it's designed to force small-business owners out of business.

Picking winners and losers.

Crony Economics.

When you never work on a home that costs $1.5 mil what's the point of carrying that amount of insurance other then to make sure a lawyer gets a big paycheck collecting punitive damages in a lawsuit.

If that were the case, why in god's name would the insurance carrier be complicit in this little plot?

Not everything's a conspiracy guys.

says you!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

The price of the homes you work are one of many factors.

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

It’s a perfectly appropriate requirement where the well being and perhaps lives of Americans are at stake. It is indicative of the fact that we are not a third world country.

Consumers are entitled to know that their homes are being worked on by serious, qualified professionals – they’ve mandated the states to regulate this and other industries accordingly.

 

[AVG-JOE]

So, Here are the Basics. I live in Michigan. For the last 25 Years I have worked in the Residential New Construction and Home Improvement Repair Industry in one way or another.

About 15 Years ago I actually ran my own company doing roofing and siding and did pretty well.

Well for Personal Reasons I have for most of the last 10 Years been working for other people rather than myself. However now with the economy the way it is. I have been trying to start up my own Roofing Company again. Believe it or not, while new construction is slow, the home Improvement Industry is doing well. People unable to move are instead putting money into their existing homes.

Well anyways, As a roofer you are required by law to carry certain amounts of Insurance. Both to cover you and any workers when working on someones home, and here where I live I find out that unlike 10 years ago. I now have no choice and have to carry a min of 1.5 Million in Coverage in case we damage a home.

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

Would you, as an entrepreneur prefer a concept instead of a number?

What I mean is, instead of laws that lean toward dollar amounts of liability, laws worded toward personal responsibility, like "Carry what insurance you want, but if you fuck something up and it's your fault, you're responsible."

'Course it's buyer beware when it comes to hiring a contractor if there's no legal limits to liability and every one of us knows a guy who has bet on himself and lost... can We trust Ourselves?

 

[Full-Auto]

So, Here are the Basics. I live in Michigan. For the last 25 Years I have worked in the Residential New Construction and Home Improvement Repair Industry in one way or another.

About 15 Years ago I actually ran my own company doing roofing and siding and did pretty well.

Well for Personal Reasons I have for most of the last 10 Years been working for other people rather than myself. However now with the economy the way it is. I have been trying to start up my own Roofing Company again. Believe it or not, while new construction is slow, the home Improvement Industry is doing well. People unable to move are instead putting money into their existing homes.

Well anyways, As a roofer you are required by law to carry certain amounts of Insurance. Both to cover you and any workers when working on someones home, and here where I live I find out that unlike 10 years ago. I now have no choice and have to carry a min of 1.5 Million in Coverage in case we damage a home.

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

Would you, as an entrepreneur prefer a concept instead of a number?

What I mean is, instead of laws that lean toward dollar amounts of liability, laws worded toward personal responsibility, like "Carry what insurance you want, but if you fuck something up and it's your fault, you're responsible."

'Course it's buyer beware when it comes to hiring a contractor if there's no legal limits to liability and every one of us knows a guy who has bet on himself and lost... can We trust Ourselves?

When I first started as a framing contractor, My insurance requirement was two million.

The avg payment for that construction was 85 hundred.

 

[Conservative]

So, Here are the Basics. I live in Michigan. For the last 25 Years I have worked in the Residential New Construction and Home Improvement Repair Industry in one way or another.

About 15 Years ago I actually ran my own company doing roofing and siding and did pretty well.

Well for Personal Reasons I have for most of the last 10 Years been working for other people rather than myself. However now with the economy the way it is. I have been trying to start up my own Roofing Company again. Believe it or not, while new construction is slow, the home Improvement Industry is doing well. People unable to move are instead putting money into their existing homes.

Well anyways, As a roofer you are required by law to carry certain amounts of Insurance. Both to cover you and any workers when working on someones home, and here where I live I find out that unlike 10 years ago. I now have no choice and have to carry a min of 1.5 Million in Coverage in case we damage a home.

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

Can you double check that with the state? Everything I found online shows a minimum for MI of $1 mil. It's still more than you need, but I'd bet it's less expensive than $1.5 mil.

 

[mudwhistle]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp-oqAQl6Ic]‪Obama's 'Pivot' To Jobs The Deja Vu Reel‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I dunno Traj, feeling particularly nasty tonight. It's not so much this individual post as it is how much of an idiot he is in general.

well, I hear him. I can take a guess as to why he may have to carry the higher ins. maybe, there are larger outfits that have lobbied the statehouse to make the ins. necessary larger to force the little guy out...happens all the time.

you know what it takes to cut hair in cali? unreal.

Friend, I'm in one of the most heavily regulated businesses out there. I had a gun salesman, yes, a man who sold live firearms, who was a customer tell me he is not nearly as regulated as we are. So I know it's a pain in the ass. And I'm inspected, unannounced, by the feds, specifically APHIS.

HOWEVER - I do indeed tire of "WAAAAAAAAHHHH! SOMETHING'S NOT GOING RIGHT! IT MUST BE THE GOVERNMENT'S FAULT!"

It's the same rules for everyone. Structure it into your price schedule and move on. The government is not a big boogeyman dispatched to get just you.

No, in general it is a big bogeyman structured to keep competition down and help the big, politically connected, business charge higher prices.

 

[Full-Auto]

‪Obama's 'Pivot' To Jobs The Deja Vu Reel‬‏ - YouTube

Are you sure he isnt thinking about divots?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I personally know a guy who owned a roofing company, burned down a commercial building.
Did not have enough ins and filed bankruptcy.

You know a guy that burned down a building while roofing it? I have worked with some really stupid people in my life, one of whom fell off the roof 4 times the first day I was there, and I never met anyone dumb enough to accidentally burn down anything while roofing it. Did he have to have someone remind him to breathe?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It appears to be the governments fault somehow?

Seems like this is one of the few laws actually designed to protect the consumer.

Actually it's designed to force small-business owners out of business.

Picking winners and losers.

Crony Economics.

When you never work on a home that costs $1.5 mil what's the point of carrying that amount of insurance other then to make sure a lawyer gets a big paycheck collecting punitive damages in a lawsuit.

If that were the case, why in god's name would the insurance carrier be complicit in this little plot?

Not everything's a conspiracy guys.

Why on Earth wouldn't they? They get a larger premium check, and still cover the same risk.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So the argument the repubs are putting out there is this is one way to force out the little guys. That sounds like there isn't a equal playing field for the little guy. Isn't that what you guys call class warfare?

But the rich get richer...I agree with you.

 

[bodecea]

But ask any obamabot, they haven't done anything to hurt business, Go ahead and ask them. they'll tell you.

Ah, Insurance companies are Obamabots....who knew?