Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Oooh. Somebody doesn't like being mocked.
Thank you, Dave, for another astonishingly profound contribution.
Yes Hank Hill, you've hurt me deeply.
Ahhh. So you're free to shit in a thread, but all my posts have to be "astonishingly profound contributions".Yes Hank Hill, you've hurt me deeply.
Can I just get some assistance to understand your issue. Your first post in this comment added what exactly to the thread?
I suggest you might what to check out the definition of 'hypocrisy', Cuyo.
Nothing + Nothing makes nothing. My dog likes dog biscuits. Do you find that intuitive? The value of this whiny OP thread is neither increased nor decreased by adding that bit of information.
Unfortunately, this sums up reality fairly well for today.
Anarchy however, is not the answer - there is a place for government, a required place if we want to maintain the lifestyle Americans are accustomed to. The answer begins with simplification of the tax code. Even much of the hated 'regulation' bitched about so eloquently here can be traced back to congress taking upon themselves the power to tax you differently from me, a power NOT given to them by our constitution.
Simple taxes & regulation = fair taxes and regulation.
Fair taxes, a budget balanced by law and then build a government and society our children can be proud of and receive from us with thanks and hope instead of fear and resentment.
I have never advocated getting rid of government, I just want it small enough that it does not create regulations just to justify its existence.
Me too.
Fair taxes, budget balanced by law, THEN build a government.
I have never advocated getting rid of government, I just want it small enough that it does not create regulations just to justify its existence.
Me too.
Fair taxes, budget balanced by law, THEN build a government.
Generally not how it works.
But feel free to try your experiment on any one of these wonderful places!
Islands for Sale, Private Islands, Luxury Real Estate
No, your contemporary 'Mudwhistle' is arguing that the insurance company will have to pay out the $1.5M in punitive damages, hence the only winners are the lawyer for the plaintiff, and of course the actual plaintiff.
You really have no idea how insurance and lawyers work, do you. They settle cases rather than go to court and risk punitive damages, and they do this even when the fault clearly lies with someone other than the party they insure. That is because they take the advice of lawyers who like to tell them about all the big scary jury verdicts, while they actually encourage the same juries to give those verdicts.
Don't get me wrong, it is not the same lawyers, but they all belong to the same clubs. They routinely jump from defending insurance companies to suing them, and then back to defending them. They get their big money off the big cases where they sue them, which is why they always lobby against tort reform, even when they work for people that would directly benefit from it.
Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............
It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.
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.
That is exactly the problem with Big Government. Same rules for everyone. Whether your a big company or small you need to carry the same coverage. If I structure it into my price schedule I would have to charge to much to compete with the bigger guys who can do more volume than me. Why is it so hard for government not to have one size fits all rules. Why can I not buy Insurance That is enough to Cover the homes I work on, and not have to buy 2 to 3 Times as much as I need just because government tells me to.
It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.
10 Years ago here in Michigan You could buy insurance based on what you needed not on some arbitrary amount the government decided. It is exactly things like this that stand in the way of small business. Which is exactly what I am trying to be. However when I have to pay so much in Insurance costs that I would need to do about 3 times as much work a month as I can do alone. It means I can't start off small like I did last time. That in order to make it I would need at least 2 Employees right away, and take on all the costs associated with that right off the bat. Just to be able to do enough work to justify the Monthly Insurance costs.
It's just stupid, and just one small example of how well intended government regulations can stifle our economy in ways you do not even think about.
Apples and oranges..but do go on.
But do you think that you shouldn't have to carry insurance?
It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.
That is exactly the problem with Big Government. Same rules for everyone. Whether your a big company or small you need to carry the same coverage. If I structure it into my price schedule I would have to charge to much to compete with the bigger guys who can do more volume than me. Why is it so hard for government not to have one size fits all rules. Why can I not buy Insurance That is enough to Cover the homes I work on, and not have to buy 2 to 3 Times as much as I need just because government tells me to.
It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.
10 Years ago here in Michigan You could buy insurance based on what you needed not on some arbitrary amount the government decided. It is exactly things like this that stand in the way of small business. Which is exactly what I am trying to be. However when I have to pay so much in Insurance costs that I would need to do about 3 times as much work a month as I can do alone. It means I can't start off small like I did last time. That in order to make it I would need at least 2 Employees right away, and take on all the costs associated with that right off the bat. Just to be able to do enough work to justify the Monthly Insurance costs.
It's just stupid, and just one small example of how well intended government regulations can stifle our economy in ways you do not even think about.
Apples and oranges..but do go on.
But do you think that you shouldn't have to carry insurance?
Of course I should have to carry insurance, But I should be able to tailor my coverage to my business and not be mandated to buy 3 times as much coverage as I could possibly ever need. Just like you used to be able to do, in this state. Before we had 12 Years of a democrat Governor.
You really have no idea how insurance and lawyers work, do you. They settle cases rather than go to court and risk punitive damages, and they do this even when the fault clearly lies with someone other than the party they insure. That is because they take the advice of lawyers who like to tell them about all the big scary jury verdicts, while they actually encourage the same juries to give those verdicts.
Don't get me wrong, it is not the same lawyers, but they all belong to the same clubs. They routinely jump from defending insurance companies to suing them, and then back to defending them. They get their big money off the big cases where they sue them, which is why they always lobby against tort reform, even when they work for people that would directly benefit from it.
Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............
It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.
The lawyer always wins, even when the insurance company wins.
Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............
It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.
The lawyer always wins, even when the insurance company wins.
It's not a conspiracy, Oddball.
If you only had .25 mil in liability ins would you only work on houses valued at 250k or less?
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.
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.
Guy's, when you are in business, working on or responsible for other peoples property, Liability Insurance is a part of the equation. It is a realistic expectation. Deal with it.
