Why the hell is everything on allocation?

Most other countries have nationalized health insurance, if not the whole Magilla. Insurance *is* cherry-picking. Name one (other) type of insurance that rates everyone as the same risk? Life insurance? Car? Nope, and nope.

Are you surprised by this? With no record how do they rate the risk? It's exactly the same thing.

ed

is

That's the loan-holder's prerogative, not ours. That they choose to foreclose suggests that it's in their interest. Or maybe it's just more palatable than letting deadbeats steal from them.

atter

ty of

and

You're making it too complicated. As to the instant situation, if the buyer got a house he liked for a payment he could afford, where's the complaint?

Weren't consumers actually speculating, greedy for profits? Should that behavior be rewarded? They keep any appreciation and shirk any losses? I bought some raisins for too dearly the other day. I ate them. Now I'm sorry. Am I due a refund?

The requirements for any legal contract include agreement on price, product, and delivery. If any aspect (e.g. prices) can be renegotiated retroactively, then legal contracts of any sort are no longer possible, no longer meaningful. What sane entity would loan you any money for any reason under those conditions? Try getting a loan then.

Oh, wait, isn't that kind of where we're going, right now?

-- Cheers, James Arthur

I suppose it's a judgment call on the part of the bank: Is the homeowner really going to default (clearly, in the present situation, the answer is quite often "yes!") or are they just trying to squeeze the bank? In the later case, call the bluff and see what happens.

I'm of the opinion that very few homeowners ever intend to default... but many homeowners will -- if a bank extends the offer -- take on a mortgage that's far outside of what traditional figures of risk would suggest they comfortably should.

In some cases I'd hope that the mortgage holder would still qualify (be a good risk for) a re-financed mortgage at the now-historically-low rates available.

If they're already at a low rate and it's interest only, well then, yeah... clearly someone is going to have to recognize a loss. Statistically this is going to be the banks more often than the homeowner, if only because banks have more money in the bank (ha, ha) than most homeowners do; they'll just declare bankruptcy and live with rotten credit for 7 years if squeezed.

---Joel

Ok, how many of the people who are defaulting could salvage their house with a

If they're looking at an upside-down mortgage for the next 25 years, many will just let the bank deal with it.

That's the problem. Everyone who could qualify to re-finance, has. My wife works in a bank and gets paid a pretty good buck for referrals. She even had one last month. But you can't refinance if you're behind (makes sense to me) or if the mortgage is upside-down (also makes sense). Remember, many of these mortgages were 100%, or even more.

...and that's exactly what is happening. Even people who can afford the payments have no interest in being upside down for the next few decades. Loaning money with nothing down[*] to people on not much more than a signature was a recipe for disaster.

In general I agree... but when you have a massive number of defaults as we just have, it isn't unreasonable -- in my view -- for the government to step in and try to moderate things a bit -- particularly when they themselves have had a significant role in creating the problem in the first place.

I don't think there are many people in that situation who are complaining. It's usually the loss of a job or a medical crisis that causes people to start missing their mortgage payments; people who are simply "upside down" are quite often willing to just sit on the property until values recovery.

A (relative) few, yes.

No, but unfortunately I think it's largley impossible to separate out the "greedy speculators" from the "generally honest but ignorant and now down on their luck"-types. Indeed, this is precisely the sort of determination that the lendors are supposed to make before they offer a loan, you know?

No different than what companies strive to do: Privatize profits and publicize ("externalize") losses.

No, but if it turns out a million other peopple did the same thing, and the raisin manufacturer was made to sell to people they knew would likely have such a reaction, then it's time for the feds to step in and shake things up a bit.

That's Glenn Beck logic: Yeah, with an incredible extrapolation of what's going on now, yes, conceivably that could happen... but in reality it just isn't going to happen.

Yes, absolutely. But give it time -- things will turn around soon enough, if they haven't already: The perception of risk for lending/investing money today has outstripped the actual risk, and hence soon the "smart money" will get going again, eventually followed by the masses'.

Of course, cutting government spending, reducing taxing, and otherwise making the economy more attractive to businesses will only hasten this recovery.

---Joel

on

In the US, earthquake insurance does. And I have had life insurance offers that were without underwriting. Not that they are always the best deals but they were there. In health care pretty much all group plans do. You start at a large company, you get insurance. Simple as that.

I am almost squarely against the health care law since it contains some really bad stuff but I do support the ban on cherry-picking. Because in health care that's wrong. I know people who have kids born with some health issue and they can't get insurance. They did not smoke, drink or do anything for this to come about, so weeding them out of a risk pool is not only wrong but highly immoral.

Yes.

As I said, there was a record. A very long one at that.

No, it ain't. They simply didn't want to make the effort or had stupid internal rules. Moving internationally isn't something that started yesterday.

It gets this bad: When I applied for health coverage I properly authorized them to sniff out our files at the doc, have them sent over. Didn't happen. After time almost had run out I called them for the umpteenth time. "They didn't send them". Called the doc. "They didn't give us $30 so we didn't send them". Hung up and took another plan. _Then_ the doc sent out advertisements how great his group is and all that, and whether we'd please consider coming back. Told them that we'd like to but can't because our new HMO won't let us, and that they effectively shot themselves in the foot. For thirty bucks.

Hmm... ok; I definitely don't know the numbers at present.

I'd actually think it'd be very few (say, works in a bank and gets paid a pretty good buck for referrals. She even

I dunno, I would expect that it would still often make more sense to re-finance the mortgage (incuding adding on any missed payments) than to risk the homeowner defaulting. At the very least, it delays a foreclosure, which should help the banks given the glut that are occurring right now.

---Joel

on

Nonsense. The rates are based on the chances of earthquake damage, which is based on where you live. TX won't have the same rates as CA.

Products like Gerber, sure. The rates are set at the worst case. Health insurance companies do the same, where they're allowed. Where they're not, they don't do business. That's sorta what happens when government gets involved; choices go away.

But the rates for that group are based on the experience the insurer has with that group. They're insuring the group, not the individuals in that group.

Without "cherry picking" there is no insurance. The real problem is that "health insurance" isn't insurance at all.

The record is not usable. They have no idea of the accuracy of the information.

No, they simply can't use the information. There is no way to check the accuracy. Do you think they trust the information given by any other insured?

So send the doctor the $30.

That's obviously not an insurance problem.

bet on

It is a statewide insurance plan. AFAIK the rates where we live are the same as in S.F. whether the risk is orders of magnitude higher.

I am certainly for minimal gov involvement, into anything. But there are things where it has to be involved and health care is one of those. Only to some extent though, not what we'll see now.

Same with electricity. Else they could say "Oh, Keith lives too far out in the boonies now, we won't supply his neighborhood any longer. Not enough profit". Poof ... lights go out.

Yep, and it works. That's how many insurance companies in Germany work, a country that has nationalized health insurance. For example, there is one for engineers which costs a bit less because engineers tend to become sick less often. But they can't turn you down just because you had a cardiac episode way back when.

Then maybe it shouldn't be insurance.

It takes very little effort to find out that it is accurate. Had to be, by law. From nationwide insurers I'd have expected better.

Information from a major overseas insurance carrier can easily be verified. It takes one email.

By the time they told me that, time had run out. I could not believe the amount of greediness on both sides. Oh well, that doctor's group lost two patients that way and never got them back.

It was. Caused by an HMO. One that consequently never saw a dime of business or referral from us.

Penalties? Elucidate, please.

I've been noticing more and more RS parts are out of stock when I've ordered them. They are pulling in components from stocks all over Europe, which results in uneconomic things like a packet of 20 quarter-watt resistors being posted separately from Paris to the UK.

My latest order included a few reels of different colours of 7/0.2mm stranded wire. I was told that all wires of that type are now discontinued (just a few colours remain in stock), there is no equivalent in the catalogue and new stock isn't expected until February.

I bought the last 16 of my ethernet modules from Farnell (out of the 50 I wanted). 6 came from the continent somewhere, 10 from the UK.

Mouser still had some, but exporting them is restricted. In case I use them in my ethernet-connected home-made nuclear missile, presumably.

=3D

the

tead

rcing

laws

be

eds or

ve

ial

The greater question is 'why is it any of the federal government's business what exact arrangement is negotiated between someone with work and a potential worker?' And how then exactly does this rabid fixation over whether someone borrowed a soldering iron or used his own advance employment in America?

And then, adding insult to injury, in pursuit of this none-of-their business (literally) vendetta, MiniPlenty takes this starting point and launches an army-of-lawyers crusade to re-define what 'is' is.

So, if you give a guy a desk on-site as a courtesy, it's a crime. Great.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

My wife

en had

to me)

f these

You *can* refinance if you're upside-down--the FHA (aka Mr. Obama) has been advertising it on the radio. Of course they've been saturation- advertising the benefits of the new health-control act too.

Not advertised (strangely): Obamacare Forces SEIU Union to Drop Healthcare for Kids

Part of the "they're kids until 26" benefit. Sweet, id'nit?

-- Cheers, James Arthur

tep

have

So, because the government forced people to over-pay for houses, tax payers should buy part of those peoples' houses?

start

I don't think so.

First, the idea that medical 'crisis' causes most financial crisis, while promoted by our very own Congress, is simply a lie. They got that manipulating data showing that 2/3rds of people claiming bankruptcy also hadn't paid their doctors, then turned that around to claim that medical bills caused 2/3rds of bankruptcies. That gem is memorialized in Obamacare, carved in stone for all to see.

3rd, I've personally been in hundreds and hundreds of foreclosures, and sampled the paperwork of countless many. The usual story, by far, is a homeowner who refinanced every cent of equity out of their house as the bubble inflated--taking the bank's money--spent then money, then defaulted, or variations on that theme.

Loads of people are defaulting simply because they're under water.

No, I'm serious, and it's true--would you take a chance lending your money to someone for 10-20-30 years, where the government can re-write the rules at any time, with no recourse for you, and always to your disadvantage? Why would you?

I absolutely would not. I would not loan someone my own money for real estate right now, for any reason, period. The government might not enforce the contract; I could lose it all, arbitrarily, because of politics.

Some of that *is* happening right now, and the country has been holding its breath to see how far it will go.

gh, if

today

king

The economy? All we ever had to do was take our boot off its neck. That hasn't happened yet, but there's hope for some change. Hope-n- change.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

I too order about half of my orders from Digi-key. It just works so much better. You just order from website and two days later postman brings parcel to your door.(and all other letters too. Saves one trip to postbox :) And Digi-key has that nice deal of free shipping on orders over 65 euros. That makes their already cheap prices even cheaper.

Quite different than ordering from eq. Elfa: First the website sometimes loses orders so it is better to write them on paper and personally give it to the clerk in their shop. If product is available from their Sweden warehouse then fine it is usually there the next day. But if it is only available from the warehouse in Switcherland then it somehow takes two to three weeks to get there. And they send wrong items often. Not nice if it is from that Switcherland warehouse, it will take another two weeks to get the correct item. And then they aren't exactly cheap.

A couple of months ago, we were notified by Anthem that my rates were going up to a level that I could not really budget anymore. Contacted my agent, and asked for rates for alternatives, and he came back with the same plan, but with a higher deductible that was right in my price point. I agreed, and we filed the paperwork. My next bill would reflect the difference.

Comes the next bill, and it is WAY higher than I had been quoted. Of course the bill comes in on Saturday, with no one available to ask about it. I send an email to the agent.

On Monday, I spend two hours on hold and finally get someone at the insurance company. After a long discussion, I find out that, yes, I did change plans, but that did not stop the price increase. It still went through... Happy, I was not!

Got agent on phone, and he tells me he DID take the increases into account, and quoted accordingly. He says he will check on it.

Calls me back later. Insurance company pulled a fast one. They increased the rates, but he HAD taken that into account. What he hadn't realized was that they had reclassified the area from one rate to a new, higher rate area! All his quotes had been wrong because of this little sleight of hand by Anthem.

Next week, I call the agent to switch me to some other company!

Charlie

Hi Robert, Speeled it out in a differnt post in the thread. Basically, they are two fold. First, you, the employer, owe ALL the taxes that should have been withheld, including income taxes, if the contractor had been an employee. This includes any penalties for late payments, and they go back to whenever you hired the contractor. Then, they examine ALL your other contractors with a fine tooth comb, to see if they are also mis-classified, and charge you the same for them! The penalties are quite often higher than the salaries paid for the contractor in the first place...

Charlie

Farnell has a similar brand called Multicomp.