Chosening Insurance

How the unemployment insurance program works

2007-12-07T21:17:00.000-08:00

Since its inception in 1935, the unemployment insurance (UI) program in the United States has operated as the primary safety net for those who involuntarily lose their jobs. Although the UI program's broad guidelines are established by federal law, UI essentially operates as a state-level program. Policy decisions regarding the main components of unemployment insurance, such as eligibility, benefit generosity, and financing, are determined by each state, resulting in substantial variations in UI programs across the country.

Eligibility
Prior to receiving UI benefits, unemployed workers must qualify or be eligible under their state's rules. Nationally, in 2003, 41% of unemployed workers received UI benefits (see Table B). For a variety of reasons, many unemployed workers are ineligible to receive benefits. Of those workers who lost their jobs, 74% received UI benefits in 2003. The more common obstacles to eligibility are outlined below.

Initial eligibility
To receive benefits, unemployed workers must file an initial claim with their state's UI program to see if they meet state-determined eligibility criteria. In order to qualify for UI benefits, jobless workers must meet their state's initial monetary eligibility requirements (i.e., a worker must have earned a certain amount of money in a given time period) and nonmonetary requirements related to their separation from their prior employer (i.e., a worker's separation from prior employment must be for allowable reasons).

Monetary eligibility requirements. Most states determine whether an unemployed worker is eligible for UI benefits based on his or her earnings in the highest quarter or the two highest quarters of the "base period." The majority of states define the base period as the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters. Based on this definition, from three to six months of a jobless worker's most recent earnings history is excluded for the purpose of determining eligibility for UI benefits. Many states also require the unemployed worker to have earned a certain amount in the base period. These earnings requirements vary significantly by state. Table A provides some detail on each state's monetary eligibility requirements and whether the state has adopted an "alternative base period" that considers earnings from the worker's most recently completed calendar quarter.

Nonmonetary eligibility requirements. Any of the following circumstances could cause an unemployed worker to be denied UI benefits:

job not covered by unemployment insurance (i.e., some states do not cover the self-employed, independent contractors, and some agricultural workers);
left job without good cause (states vary as to exceptions to the good cause requirement and whether good cause must be related to employment or can also be for personal reasons); or
fired for misconduct cause (some states require gross misconduct or just cause; usually the conduct must be intentional and an employee who made inadvertent mistakes or lacked the ability to perform the job would still be eligible).

Even if one or more of these circumstances applies, a worker should file a UI claim with the state agency and allow the state agency to determine whether or not the employee is eligible for UI benefits. Filing a UI claim regardless of circumstances is advisable because states vary significantly in their definitions of "good cause" and "misconduct," and an unemployed worker may not know whether he or she is eligible for UI without having the state make a formal determination. Similarly, in some cases employers classify individuals as independent contractors even when, in reality, they are employees and should therefore receive unemployment insurance.

Continuing eligibility
Once a worker is deemed eligible for benefits, a worker must also satisfy continuing eligibility requirements. If a worker fails to satisfy these conditions, that worker's benefits may be postponed temporarily, cancelled entirely, or reduced. Typically, unemployed workers must make a weekly "continuing claim" on the UI program verifying that they were "able and available" and "actively searching" for employment. Workers may fail to meet these criteria if they:

limit their job search to part-time work in a state that requires workers to be "able and available" for full-time work;
fail to search for work in a given week;
find a job;
turn down a "suitable" job offer; or
exhaust UI benefits because they received the maximum amount of benefits for which they were qualified or because they received the maximum number of weeks of benefits for which they were qualified.

Hearings and appeals
Every state permits workers affected by unfavorable decisions to file appeals. All states also provide a hearing before an administrative law judge or hearing officer, as well as further appeals to court. In order to take advantage of these avenues, a worker must file an initial claim, and then appeal any unfavorable decisions within the time required by the state. That time period could range from a few days to 30 days, depending upon each state's rules. Legal aid offices, unions, and community groups offer advice or assistance with appeals in some areas, but a lawyer is not needed to appeal or get a hearing. Depending upon the state, court proceedings may be difficult or impossible for non-lawyers, but all agency appeals are open to unrepresented workers.

Amount of UI benefits
If workers make it over these eligibility hurdles, they can expect, in most states, to have about half their lost (pretax) wages replaced by UI benefits. There are limits on weekly benefits—each state has adopted a maximum weekly benefit amount that is paid to workers in the state. As a result, some workers—particularly higher-wage earners—receive less than 50% of their lost wages. Nationally, UI replaced just over 47% of a worker's lost wages in 2003. (This is referred to as the "replacement rate.") Because, on average, women earn less than men, women have a higher percentage of their earnings replaced by UI (49%) than men (46%). Similarly, Hispanics (50%) and African Americans (49%) have a higher percentage of their earnings replaced than do whites (47%). Although the percentage of lost income replaced by UI benefits has remained fairly stable from 1988 through the present, the real replacement rate has actually fallen due to the fact that, as of 1987, UI benefits are now treated as income and are taxed fully by the federal government.

The average UI weekly benefit check in 2003 was $262 ($1,135 per month). The average weekly benefit amount varies significantly by state, from a low of $173 in Arizona and Mississippi to a high of $357 in Massachusetts (see Table B). See EPI's Weekly Benefit Amount (WBA) Calculator to estimate the weekly benefit amount a typical worker might be expected to receive in a given state as of August 2004.

UI benefits rarely provide enough money for families to make ends meet. A 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office found that "[w]hen UI receipients lost their job, their income—excluding UI benefits—dropped by almost 60 percent. With UI benefits included, the income loss was about 40 percent." The study also found that almost 25% of UI recipients who remained out of work for four months or more fell into poverty despite getting UI benefits.

Duration of UI benefits
Most state UI programs provide a maximum potential duration of 26 weeks during non-recessionary periods. However, the average duration of benefits collected is much lower than 26 weeks. In 2003, the average duration of regular state UI benefits was 16.4 weeks nationally, but varied by state from 12.4 weeks in North and South Dakota to 20.5 weeks in the District of Columbia (see Table B). This number is less than 26 weeks for a number of reasons, including cases in which the unemployed worker: (1) found a new job, (2) qualified for less than 26 weeks of benefits, or (3) was disqualified for a continuing eligibility violation (e.g., not actively seeking work, rejecting offer of "suitable" work). Because UI benefits are limited, some individuals run out of benefits, or "exhaust" benefits, before they find a new job. In 2003, 4.4 million workers, or 43.5% of UI recipients, exhausted their UI benefits. Individuals who exhaust the weeks to which they were entitled may only receive additional benefits if they later re-qualify for UI after additional work.

There are two programs that may extend the 26-week maximum benefit duration during economic hard times:

First, there is a federal-state Extended Benefits program under which UI recipients in every state may be able to receive up to 13 additional weeks of benefits for a total of up to 39 weeks. The state and federal government each pay half of the costs of the Extended Benefits program and weekly benefits are identical to those in the regular UI program. The Extended Benefits program is activated automatically, or "triggers on," when a state's 13-week average insured unemployment rate reaches 5% and is a 120% increase from the same 13-week period in the last two years. A second, optional trigger (which has been adopted by most states) occurs when a state's 13-week average insured unemployment rate reaches 6% (the 120% factor does not need to be met). Unfortunately, these programs do not always work well, with only a handful of states helping their long-term unemployed in this way in the last recession.
Second, Congress may decide to use existing federal UI trust fund monies to pay temporary extended UI benefits. During 2002 and 2003, UI recipients in most states were able to receive up to 13 additional weeks of benefits through the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 (TEUC), with "high" unemployment states providing their workers another 13 weeks. Unfortunately, the TEUC program expired in December 2003 with benefits phased out by March 31, 2004. These extended benefits are therefore no longer available despite the high number of UI recipients who continue to exhaust benefits. Measures to extend TEUC past its December 2003 expiration in the Senate and House have been defeated by a relatively small number of votes each time.

Financing of UI benefits
Adequate financing for the UI program is crucial because it determines, at least in part, each state's policies on eligibility and benefit generosity. Most states adjust their employer tax rates based on their trust fund solvency. In some states, the financial solvency of the UI program directly determines benefit levels. For example, some state legislatures have voted to cut UI benefits or restrict eligibility when their trust fund balances are low. Louisiana 's law is a particularly unique example of the interdependence between benefits and trust fund solvency—the state's trust fund balance directly determines the formula that is used to compute weekly benefits and the maximum weekly benefit amount.

The unemployment insurance program is financed primarily by taxes levied on employers. There are two components of these taxes: (1) a federal tax that is used to pay for the federal and state administration of the program; and (2) a state tax that is used to pay state UI benefits.

Federal UI taxes pay administrative costs
Federal UI taxes pay for federal and state administrative costs, the federal portion of the Extended Benefits program, and loans to states with insolvent trust funds. Technically, the federal UI payroll tax is 6.2% of the first $7,000 of a covered employee's wages. However, employers in states with UI programs that meet the federal guidelines (a $7,000 taxable wage base, a maximum employer tax rate of at least 5.4%, state administrative performance standards) receive a 5.4% credit toward their federal tax payment, reducing their tax rate to 0.8%. Since all states have federally approved programs, 0.8% is the effective federal tax rate. The 0.8% rate includes a surtax of 0.2% that Congress passed in 1976 and has extended multiple times; this surtax is set to expire on December 31, 2007.

In March 2002, Congress approved an unprecedented $8 billion "Reed Act" distribution to the states and encouraged states to use it to expand their UI programs. A General Accounting Office report found that most states used this money to avoid raising their state unemployment taxes on employers. The Department of Labor has been considering proposals that would change the manner in which administrative costs are funded.

State UI taxes pay benefits
Each state determines the amount of an employee's wages that is subject to the state UI tax and the tax rates it charges employers. These state taxes pay for state UI benefits and one-half of the federal-state Extended Benefits program. The first component of an employer's state UI taxes is the state's taxable wage base. Federal law requires states to tax at least the first $7,000 of a covered employee's wages. While 10 states (20%) set their 2004 taxable wage base at $7,000, the remaining states have adopted a higher taxable wage base (see Table C). In a state with a taxable wage base of $9,000, an employer would pay the same state UI taxes on an employee who earns $9,000 a year as it would for an employee who earns $100,000 a year. Because a portion of the cost of a payroll tax is likely to be passed on to workers in the form of lower wages, low-wage workers and part-time workers (and their employers) "pay" more than higher-wage and full-time workers. Finally, some states' taxable wage base increases automatically every year because they index their taxable wage base to their individual state's average annual wage or annual weekly wage.

The second component of an employer's state UI taxes is the tax rate an individual employer is charged. The UI program is experience-rated, meaning that, within a given state, firms that lay off a higher percentage of workers and whose employees collect a higher amount of UI benefits pay higher tax rates than firms that lay off fewer workers. The goal of experience rating is to discourage employers from laying off workers, particularly during temporary downturns. The United States' experience rating system is unique—no other country taxes its employers based on their past "experience" laying off workers. The national average state tax rate in 2003 was 2.1%, from a low of 0.6% in Georgia and Utah to a high of 4.1% in New York. Depending on the employer and the state, an employer's maximum UI state payroll tax rate in 2004 could range from a low of 5.4% (Missouri) to almost 11% (Arkansas, Massachusetts) (see Table C ). In addition, a state's tax schedule typically changes so that the same employer would pay a higher tax rate when the state UI trust fund balance is low, and a lower tax rate when the state UI trust fund balance is healthier. In addition, three states (Alaska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) also require employees to make a contribution.

UI taxes are comparatively small, representing just over half of one percent (0.6%) of all earnings for those workers covered by the program in 2003. On average, the combined annual state and federal UI tax on employers was just $253 per employee in 2003 ($201 in average state taxes and $52 in federal taxes).

UI trust fund solvency
Many state UI programs have had problems because they have failed to collect enough tax revenue from employers during economic expansions, setting tax rates too low and subjecting too small a share of wages to taxation. Since more workers file UI claims in bad economic times—when tax revenues are low because employment is lower—it is vital for states to build adequate trust funds in good economic times.

The "average high cost multiple" (AHCM) is one measure that is used to analyze state UI trust fund solvency. A state's AHCM is the average of the three most recent high-cost calendar years that include either three recessions or at least 20 years of UI payment history. An AHCM of 1 indicates that a state has one year's worth of reserves to pay benefits, based on the average of the three most recent high-cost years. In 1995, the Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation recommended that states maintain an AHCM of 1. Unfortunately, after the most recent recession and slow jobless recovery, the nationwide AHCM was at 0.42 for the 49 states reporting an AHCM for the first quarter of calendar year 2004.

The health of the UI trust funds varies from state to state, but many states' trust funds are considered inadequate to meet their state's needs (see Table C). For example, 14 reporting states (31%) had an AHCM of 0 to 0.5 and 32 states had an AHCM below 1.0. A state's AHCM could be low for a variety of reasons, including a low taxable wage base, low employer tax rates, high unemployment, or state eligibility and benefit rules. In the event that a state runs out of money and becomes "insolvent," the state may borrow from specially established federal funds.

Differences across states
Because each state is free to establish the components of its state UI program, the benefits an unemployed worker receives and the taxes an employer pays both vary significantly across the country. Some state-level characteristics are presented in Tables A, B, and C.

Washington is an example of a state offering a more generous UI program. In determining eligibility, Washington considers hours instead of earnings, and it considers earnings in the most recent quarter. Washington offers a higher than average weekly benefit amount and indexes the amount with average weekly wages in the state. Workers in Washington are more likely than the average U.S. worker to receive UI benefits. Its financing mechanism is also sound: Washington has one of the highest taxable wage bases ($30,200), and that wage base is indexed.

Recommendations
Many aspects of the state UI programs are in need of reform. Since states determine their own policies, the degree of reform needed varies dramatically. However, the UI program would be better if the states adopted the following broad general guidelines:

Simplify eligibility rules and benefit calculations. This would counter the false perception many workers have that they are ineligible for UI benefits, and it would allow workers to gain a sense of how much of their income they can expect to be replaced by the UI program.
Modernize eligibility rules to reflect the needs of the current workforce. To do this, states should adopt three important recommendations of the Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation. First, states should stop discarding up to six months of a worker's most recent earnings by adopting an "alternative base period." Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have already adopted an alternative base period. Second, states should extend eligibility to workers seeking part-time jobs. Third, states should base their eligibility requirements on the number of hours worked, not earnings. Almost all states' monetary eligibility rules (with the exception of Washington and Oregon) currently discriminate against low-wage workers because low-wage workers with a part-year or part-time work schedule may be ineligible to receive UI benefits whereas higher-wage workers with an identical work schedule would qualify. Adopting an hour-based eligibility approach, instead of the current earnings-based approach, would eliminate this bias and help workers at the lowest end of the pay scale.
Offer more generous UI benefits to keep workers and their families out of poverty.
Adopt a higher taxable wage base and index it to increases in their states' wages to help ensure the solvency of their UI trust funds.

Taken from : www.epinet.org

Unemployment Insurance

2007-12-07T21:16:00.000-08:00

The unemployment insurance (UI) program is a joint federal and state program that was established in 1935 to provide an essential safety net for workers who become involuntarily unemployed. Federal law and regulations provide broad guidelines and some minimum standards that the states must meet. Beyond that, the states are free to set the important parameters of their UI programs—eligibility requirements, benefit levels, and financing. As a result, the unemployment insurance programs vary across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The unemployment insurance program is financed through state and federal payroll taxes paid by employers.

In 2003, about 40% of unemployed workers received unemployment insurance benefits. In 2003, the average weekly benefit check was $262, which replaced, on average, 47% of a worker's previous salary. Workers received that benefit for an average of 16.4 weeks in 2003. Because states determine who is eligible for benefits, the weekly benefit amounts, and the duration of the benefits, the generosity of the UI program varies significantly by state.

Since the UI program was established, there have been a number of important changes in the labor market, including the rise in part-time and temporary work, the increased role of women in the workforce, and the rise of dual-income families and the difficulties they face balancing work and family obligations. Unfortunately, the unemployment insurance program has not kept pace with these changes, and presents particular difficulties for these groups of workers, as well as low-wage workers. Providing the assistance necessary to help these families requires the following state-based reforms:

States should consider a worker's most recent earnings when determining eligibility for benefits.
States should extend eligibility to workers seeking part-time jobs.
States should base their eligibility requirements on hours worked, not wages, to alleviate the inherent discrimination against low-wage workers.
States should pay more generous benefits to keep workers and their families out of poverty.

Legislators Adopt Model Law to Strengthen State Guaranty Funds

2007-11-21T18:55:00.000-08:00

A new model law adopted by the National Conference of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL) will create a stronger safety net for property/casualty guaranty funds nationwide.

According to legislators, the Post-Assessment Property and Liability Insurance Guaranty Association Model Act, adopted by NCOIL during its annual meeting in Las Vegas, would create a comprehensive, statutory remedy for paying the claims of certain consumers once their property/casualty insurers have been declared insolvent. The model bill responds to increasing concerns that state guaranty fund laws — although historically successful in promoting swift payment of consumer claims — were not designed for today's complex insurance products.

"Innocent victims of bankrupt insurance companies deserve fair, timely settlement of their claims — and don't care how they get their money," said NCOIL Property-Casualty Insurance Committee Chair Sen. Ruth Teichman, Kan. "If state guaranty fund laws are not set up for today's market, then legislators must step in. Have guaranty funds been effective over the years?" she asked. "Absolutely. But now NCOIL has acted to make sure they protect consumers well into the future."

Lawmakers on the P/C Committee, which adopted the model law on Nov. 16, looked at 11 key differences between the NCOIL proposal and language contained in a 1970 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) guaranty fund model act, and/or draft revisions to the NAIC model.

NCOIL legislators discussed whether a guaranty fund should cover business that an insolvent insurer took on before it went bankrupt; whether to ban guaranty fund coverage from people of significant financial means; the appropriate make-up of a guaranty fund's board of directors; and the date beyond which guaranty fund claims would be disallowed.

The P/C Committee examined who should have the right to manage the operations of a guaranty fund; whether a fund should intervene in relevant lawsuits; who should control records related to guaranty fund claims; whether guaranty associations should have the final say on claims determinations; and immunity.

The Committee also added a drafting note regarding the amount of money that a guaranty fund could pay for each claim. Rather than the $300,000 per-claim limit spelled out in the model law, the drafting note would allow states to adjust the claims cap depending on cost-of-livingdifferences around the country.

The P/C Committee had considered the issue for more than one year. At the NCOIL Summer Meeting in July, members voted against including language in the model act that would overview the purpose of the legislation. The Committee reasoned that such language might inadvertently allow a court to expand the statute beyond what a legislature intended.

The NCOIL Annual Meeting was held from Nov. 14-18 at the Rio All-Suite Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Nev. NCOIL is an organization of state legislators whose main area of public policy interest is insurance legislation and regulation. Most legislators active in NCOIL either chair or are members of the committees responsible for insurance legislation in their respective state houses across the country.

Source: NCOIL,
www.ncoil.org

How to Find Cheap Car Insurance For You

2007-11-21T18:54:00.000-08:00

Cheap car insurance is somethig all of us need, here are a few tips for getting a low cost car insurance poilcy.

With the rising costs of fuel and just about every other good or service we purchase, many of us are looking for cheap car insurance. When it comes to cheap car insurance most of us are clueless as to how to go about getting a low cost car insurance policy. There are many factors that influence your car insurance costs drastically.

For example, did you know that the type of car you drive will influence the cheap car insurance you're looking for? Or did you know that using anti theft devices will help reduce your over all car insurance costs? A good driving record will allow you to get cheap car insurance?

The deductible is the amount you pay first out of any claim for an accident. The car insurance policy's cost is directly related to your deductible. A lot of people, especially those with a good driving record, who have had their insurance policy for a long time, have never considered varying their deductible. If you have a clean driving record and are prepared for the risk of paying a larger amount in the event of a claim you can save money by increasing your deductible.

Many times you can get cheap car insurance by combining policies with you existing insurance company. For example if you have a home owners insurance policy contact them and ask for discounts for switching your car insurance to them. If you don't own a home perhaps you have renters insurance or life insurance, contact these companies about the savings you could get by switching your car insurance over to them. Most insurance companies are very accommodating to these requests.

It also pays to shop online for your cheap car insurance; many of the big companies offer a comparison of their coverage versus other companies. As you are requesting cheap car insurance quote online be sure to be completely truthful in answering the questionnaire. Additionally, you should know when you get your online quote you will need to follow up with actual paper work.

Whatever your motivation, with a little work you too can find the cheap car insurance you're looking for.

Business Insurance Over the Internet: What Are The Risks?

2007-11-12T05:32:00.001-08:00

It’s a truism that times have changed, and likewise, insurance has changed, too. The era of purchasing your business insurance from Uncle Harold who lives down the street has passed, if it ever existed, and the World Wide Web is your new hometown. So, is buying Internet insurance so very different from getting it from a local agent with a “brick & mortar” shop? Are there greater security and confidentiality concerns with online business insurance applications? Is “Internet insurance” another term for scam?

The short answer to all of these questions is “no.” Business insurance companies have had to change the way they market their products due to Internet insurance, but the only significant change for you is that it's now easier to get information and far more convenient to communicate with potential business insurance providers. You still have to fill out forms and you can still ask representatives questions, but now you are able to do these at 3 a.m. while sitting in the comfort of your own home wearing your pajamas.

But don’t be tempted by the relaxing convenience to relax your standards. While purchasing Internet insurance is as safe as working with an “offline” business insurance carrier, no savvy businessman would entrust their livelihood to an insurance company without checking to make sure that company is reputable and sound. Just like when you work with an “offline” company, you must do your homework. You wouldn’t hand over your money to Joe’s Shady Alley Insurance Agency, so why give it to Joe’s Shady Internet Insurance Agency?

Start off by asking: Who are these Internet insurance companies? You’ll find many of the names are familiar. The major business insurance carriers have all gone online, and if you trusted them before, there’s no reason that should change. If the company is not familiar to you, then check it out. Is it licensed to do business in your state? How long has it been in existence? Are there any outstanding complaints or lawsuits? Does it have the financial reserves to back its promises? Are there any existing clients willing to give a testimonial? Essentially, be sure to ask the same questions of an Internet insurance company that you would ask any other company.

However, just because there isn't cause for greater concern when dealing with online business insurance providers, there are different issues you need to be aware of. Online communications and transactions provide thieves with new ways to steal your information and perhaps your money. While it's highly unlikely that your information will be hijacked en route by hackers, how much of your information the Internet insurance company keeps in databases connected to the Internet and what kind of security they have is an issue. The safest alternative is if they don't keep your bank or credit card information at all, deleting that information once they process an online payment and pass that information on to a bank. However, this may rule out automatic payments and is not the standard industry practice.

A high degree of encryption (128 bit) will help preserve the security of your information, but you may also want to determine whether the business insurance firm has a redundant firewall, if their network is monitored by an external security company, and if they test their system with simulated computer-based attacks. If a company takes these sorts of precautions, you can feel as secure doing business with them online as you would if you were handing them a form across a desk.

When should we update our Life Insurance Policy?

2007-10-18T09:46:00.000-07:00

There are so many reasons to update our existing Life Insurance Policy. Your life may have changed dramatically since you first purchased your life insurance policy. Contact your life insurance agent if your life has changed in any of the ways we listed below.

Major Purchase: If you make a major purchase you should contact your life insurance agent to set up a review and possibly update your life insurance policy. There are a couple items we consider major purchases. An automobile, swimming pool or boat is not considered a major purchase and should not be reflected within your life insurance review. A major purchase is a new home, refinancing your home, and a College Education. Purchasing a home or a College Education is a substantial investment and should be covered in your death benefit to ensure your family isn't burdened with the expenses.

Relating to a College Education when you have children you should consider a Life Insurance Policy review to ensure their College Tuitions are covered with your death benefit.

Marriage or Divorce: If you get married or divorced you should contact your life insurance agent to possibly change the policy figures but more likely to change beneficiaries. Your life will change when you get married or divorced so in any case of a life changing event you should contact your life insurance agent.

Other life changing events: Any event that will significantly alter your life like an ill family member, changes to you or your families health or coming into a decent amount of money be it professionally or by inheritance. A rule of thumb could be to consider a life insurance policy review when your life has seen a major change.

If you forsee the change in the near future it is better to act now than to wait so be sure you to contact your agent in a timely manner.

Don't cancel your life insurance policy

2007-10-18T09:43:00.000-07:00

Maybe some of us very fortunate and no longer require life insurance. This can happen for many reasons but a common scenario is when an individual receives or earns a large amount of cash. Enough cash to easily cover all expenses your family may receive when you pass away. If you have millions of dollars in an interest baring account, a home thats paid for and very little other expenses perhaps you don't need life insurance. You should consult with your life insurance agent to see if this is feasible scenario but in certain instances it is.

So you no longer need your life insurance policy. Should you call your life insurance company and tell them to cancel your life insurance policy? Remember, this is the same life insurance policy you've paid $X in premiums every year for however many years. Essentially, it's as good as flushing money down the toilet at this point if you decide to just cancel the policy. Sure it protected you when you needed it but now that you don't need it why keep it?

There are a couple good reasons to keep your life insurance policy. As I mentioned above, you've already invested some money into it. Your family is already covered in the event you pass so why not make the beneficiary someone else? Perhaps leave your death benefit to your brother in law (the struggling actor) or someone else that could really use it. Another good option is to leave your life insurance benefit to a Charity. Personally, I love the Animal Shelters so I would consider leaving the death benefit to a local Animal Shelter. You may want to consult with your Accountant but I believe when the beneficiary is a Charity then your premium payments are tax deductible.

So even if you don't need the death benefit consider keeping your life insurance policy.

I have just been in a Car Accident, now what do I do?

2007-10-18T09:40:00.000-07:00

Depending on the level of severity involved in the car accident there are several things you should do. What is it ?

Keep your insurance card, title (if possible) and car registration in the car. A camera is a good idea as well as a cellular phone. The cell phone should be used to contact the Police Department. Dial 911 to speak with an operator and let them know you've been in an accident and approximately where the car accident took place. It's not a bad idea to have a camera so that you can photograph the damages but be sure you do this after the police have arrived and made the area sage. Be sure to stay in your vehicle if you're on a busy street or highway. Never get out of the car in these situations as you may get struck by other vehicles in the vicinity.

Relay to the Police Officer the sequence of events and exchange pertinent contact information with the driver(s) that were involved in the accident. Be sure to get the other driver(s) full name, address, phone number, make of the car, their insurance company, their insurance policy number, their insurance agent contact, license plate number and driver's license number.

Once the Police have concluded their reporting you can leave depending on the shape of your vehicle. If your car is too beat up ask the Police to contact a Tow truck service to remove the car.

So now your home, probably have a stiff neck and you need to start thinking about what you need to do to rectify the whole situation. Review your policy, see what your deductibles are set to and what your coverages are. It is likely if you turn in a claim to your insurance agency and you are at fault then your insurance premium will go up. If the damage to your vehicle and the other driver(s) vehicle is less than your deductible it may be a good idea to pay cash and not to contact your insurance agent.

If the damage to your vehicle and the other driver(s) vehicles are extensive you will need to contact your insurance agent. Ask them questions about the whole claim process. You will want to know how long it will take to resolve or review the claim. You will want to know how long it will take to receive your settlement to repair your damages and any rental car information. Your Insurance agent deals with this stuff all the time so they will have answers for you and hold your hand through the process.

A car accident is a scary thing that we don't want it happen and once it's over the headaches can continue if you don't have the right car insurance policy.

Do I need auto insurance?

2007-10-18T09:39:00.001-07:00

Some people ask, do I need auto insurance? My car's a piece of junk, I don't care if it gets totalled. I realize some cars aren't worth much but the fact remains that if you were at fault in an auto accident and didn't carry liability insurance then you could get sued. Some states require that you carry at least liability auto insurance and if you have a loan on the vehicle most likely your loan company will require you to have full coverage auto insurance.

So there are two types of auto insurance, there is full coverage (which included comprehensive and collision coverage) and there is basic liability insurance coverage. Comprehensive coverage is the portion of your car insurance policy that covers claims associated with your vehicle in which an accident with another vehicle doesn't occur. Common claims include theft, car catches on fire, flood etc. Collision insurance coverage is the portion of your car insurance policy that covers claims or expenses associated with your vehicle when you are at fault in an accident with another vehicle. I always think of it as when you collide with another car your Collision insurance will pay for your expenses. Neither of these usually cover rental car reimbursement, something you should defnitely consider when purchasing your car insurance policy.

Finally, Liability insurance coverage covers claims or expenses assocaited with other vehicles when dealing with an at-fault accident. If you run a stop sign and plow into Mrs. Smith's Ford Focus then your liability coverage will pay for those damages. If you total your car out in the process and don't carry Collision Insurance then your in trouble. You're either out-of-pocket to fix the damages or you see what you can get at the local scrap yard.

It's true that Collision and Comprehensive Insurance are expensive in comparison to liability but consider the expenses you may incur when buying a new car.

What are the three numbers on my car insurance policy that read 100/300/50?

2007-10-18T09:37:00.000-07:00

For your information about three numbers auto insurance. What is it?

This is a very common question and your not the first to ask. There are three numbers auto insurance companies quote and those three numbers are youe auto insurance coverage amounts. Typically, your auto insurance coverage will look like 100/300/50 or 100/300/100.

The numbers 100 and 300 are amounts $100,000 USD and $300,000 USD and they cover bodily injury. The $100,000 is per person and the $300,000 is the total amount of coverage. So if you are in an accident and you caused bodily injury on a single person inside another vehicle your coverage would up to $100,000 for that person. If you are in an accident and you caused bodily injury to 4 individuals your coverage would pay no more than $100,000 to each person and no more than $300,000 total. So if each of the 4 individuals had $100,000 claims then you would be responsible for $100,000 out-of-pocket expenses because the total would cost $400,000.

The last number 50 in the case of 100/300/50 means that you have $50,000 in coverage against property damage. So if you were at fault and went flying into a persons home and caused $75,000 in damages then you would be out-of-pocket $25,000.

Most car insurance companies will suggest at least 100/300/50. The higher your coverage the more expensive your auto insurance premium of course. So you want to have as much coverage as possible but still be able to afford the policy. Being at fault in an accident is tough, it's mentally and physically draining and the last thing most people want to worry about is coming up with a huge pile of cash to cover your expenses. Talk to your car insurance agent about auto coverages, they may be able to give you some average or common claim amounts to put your mind at ease.

How long do ticket effect your car insurance rates?

2007-10-18T09:34:00.000-07:00

In the short answer is 3 - 5 years from the ticket or violation occurs. It really depends on the insurance company and what they have in place. During this 3 - 5 year span your insurance premiums will likely rise. How much of a raise depends on the severity of the violation. For example, a $100 speeding ticket will have less influence on your insurance premium than a DUI or accident in which you and other parties have submitted a large claim. I am assuming that the period of time your insurance premium goes up is a correlation of how long the violation stays on your record and perhaps the type of violation determs the time frame.

In certain instances you may be required to fill out an SR-22 form . For more specifically, a DWI or DUI (Drunk Driving or Driving Under the Influence) charge will warrant an SR-22 form. The SR-22 is for "high-risk" drivers. The State in which you reside want's to know who is the "high-risk" drivers. SR-22 drivers are typically insured with higher premiums and sometimes they are considered uninsurable.

Either way, you can usually expect that a ticket or traffic violation will stay on your record for 3 to 5 years from the incident. If for one reason or another your car insurance company doesn't find out about your violation then your insurance rates won't likely go up. It is important that you notify your insurance of any traffic violations as not disclosing the facts about your driving record could lead to lots of issues and ultimately unisurability or something even more serious like a lawsuit.

So ... always talk openly with your auto agent. When dealing with anything auto or driving related it is important that you disclose this information to your insurance company.

How will SiCKO play?

2007-10-15T06:14:00.001-07:00

I think SiCKO's timing is perfect, and I think the movie will be a significant factor in the upcoming 2008 elections. Those politicians who run on a platform of radical health care reforms are likely to pick up a lot more support than those unwise enough to try to defend the current system.

This is a tough call for Republicans, since most Republicans support Big Pharma and the corporate control of modern medicine, usually at the expense of the people. Democrats, though, are also on Big Pharma's payroll, as was obvious with the recent voting record on the FDA Revitilization Act co-sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy. The truth is, Big Pharma owns virtually all the politicians in Washington (except Rep. Ron Paul, of course).

The movie will definitely get America talking about serious health care reforms. But as I've pointed out in a previous article, Where's the Health In Health Care Reform?, almost nobody is considering proposals that would genuinely solve the health care problem in America today. You can't "treat" your way out of a nation that has become so over-drugged, over-fed and over-diseased that even the little children are now being put on speed (also called "Ritalin"). Nearly 50 percent of American adults are now taking pharmaceuticals, most of which are utterly unnecessary from a medical point of view. Drug advertising has taken over the media, the FDA has suppressed natural alternatives, and the American Medical Association continues to peddle such health nonsense that it's amazing the AMA hasn't yet been invited to join the Smithsonian's Museum of Outdated American History.

The American Cancer Society, in my opinion, is a supremely corrupt, big-business front group that actually takes steps to ensure more cases of future cancer by "preventing prevention," the American Diabetes Association takes money from candy and soda manufacturers, and the American Psychiatric Association is so steeped in Big Pharma money that they've practically become inseparable. (Click here to see my CounterThink cartoon on this topic.)

The future of America looks dim

Clearly, something has to change in this country if we're going to survive as a nation. Under the current system of massive debt spending, widespread political corruption, war mongering and health care failures, the United States of America will simply not survive another generation. No nation that abandons the health of its people can expect to have a future. As Moore points out, however, there is a chance to save America, but only if we make significant changes starting now.

Truly radical changes must be put into place. I've offered many suggestions in a popular article, The health care reform legislation that Congress should pass, but won't. Lawmakers, you see, have no interest in actually saving America from financial demise. They're only concerned about the next election, and raising campaign reelection funds means kow-towing to the interests of the powerful corporations that really run Washington.

Personally, I don't see that meaningful reform is possible under the current system of politics in America. The Big Business sick care industry has a stranglehold on the American political system, and the whole ugly thing will mostly likely have to collapse and be rebooted before we'll see significant change.

And make no mistake: that's what's coming. I predict America will not survive its health care crisis. It won't be the first empire to crumble from arrogance and corruption. In fact, it will join a long (and growing) list of civilizations that have risen and fallen, securing its place in the pages of history as yet another imperialist nation that thought it could rule the world while abandoning the needs of its own people.

The bottom line on SiCKO

It's a must-see documentary. It's surprisingly even-handed and well grounded, never resorting to unsubstantiated claims merely to shock the audience. In fact, as a person who has been writing about America's health care problems for four years, I didn't detect a single false statement in the film. It's all true, and it's pretty damn scary. Go see it. It opens on June 29th.

And if, like one person featured in the film, I ever have to choose between reconnective surgery for my middle finger at $60,000 vs. my ring finger at $12,000, I'll choose to have my middle finger sewn on first just so I can visually demonstrate to U.S. Senators precisely how I feel about America's health care system today.

What's missing from SiCKO

2007-10-15T06:13:00.000-07:00

The material that's in SiCKO is hard-hitting, and it accomplishes what it sets out to do. But there's something missing from the film: A serious discussion about how a nation can prevent disease using nutrition, medicinal herbs, sunshine, clean water, avoidance of toxic chemicals, smart dietary choices, banning the advertising of junk foods and pharmaceuticals, and so on. Of course, that's not really what SiCKO set out to do, and this topic would require another film all by itself, but personally I wouldn't have minded a stronger nod towards solving our nation's health care problems through genuine prevention (rather than the current policy which is basically centered around waiting for everybody to get sick and then treating their symptoms while ignoring the true causes of their disease).

Of course, it might be tricky for Moore to argue for disease prevention given that he is obviously not the poster boy for ideal physical health. But he never claims to be. So the critics who attack Moore's own personal health are missing the whole point of the film. Moore is simply pointing out what's wrong with America's health care system, and he does so brilliantly and convincingly, regardless of his own personal health status. And besides, if you want to argue about the health of "experts," just walk into any hospital and take a look at the health of all the people who work there. Many aren't any healthier than Moore, and they work in the industry! The average lifespan of a U.S. doctor is less than a Cuban peasant. That's not a joke.

Regardless of Moore's present physical fitness challenges, he's obviously operating with a great degree of healthy skepticism about the way the U.S. operates today. Moore is an independent thinker who simply refuses to follow the crowd, and with this film, he's doing the job that the American people should have been doing all along -- questioning the sanity of our health care system. But sadly, the truth is that most Americans are sheeple who just follow the herd and do what they're told. A recent poll revealed that nearly 45% of Americans still trust the FDA! That's astounding, given that I've solidly established the Food and Drug Administration is far more dangerous to the health and safety of the American people than all the terrorists in the world. To learn more, read my article The lawlessness of the FDA, Big Pharma immunity, and crimes against humanity.

Why Moore is being so vicious attacked

2007-10-15T06:10:00.001-07:00

Moore, as usual, is being targeted by all sorts of critics who would like nothing better than to see this guy disappear and stop rocking the Good 'ol Boys boat that seems to be floating just fine in America (as long as you're part of the wealthy elite, anyway). For starters, U.S. government officials are investigating Moore for violating travel restrictions to Cuba. And why? Because Moore gathered a dozen Americans who were denied health care in the U.S. and brought them to Cuba where they received free, quality health care in a modern Cuban hospital.

The message is hard to miss: Cuba takes better care of its citizens than America does. In fact, Cuba is willing to take care of a few American citizens that America abandoned! That kind of "in-yo-face" embarrassment to U.S. officials isn't appreciated much in police-state America these days, where practically anyone who dares question the wisdom of the government is branded a terrorist. Moore is clearly being targeted not merely because he took some 9/11 heroes to Cuba and got them health care, but because he dared to make it all public. Humiliating the King is a quick way to find your head on a chopping block. Just ask all the scientists who publicly disagree with the Bush Administration's hopelessly politicized view on climate change...

Other critics of Moore are either the greedy, corrupt corporations impacted by his film (drug companies, health insurance providers, hospitals and so on) or juvenile stay-at-home back-seat Internet critics who don't like Moore for the simple fact that he dares to stand up and say "The Emperor Has No Clothes!" Nearly all the criticism leveled against Moore is without substance. People attack Moore personally, but they won't dare debate what he's presenting in the movie. Why? Because Michael Moore is right. America's health care system is an embarrassment to the nation, and to the world. It's so bad that most informed world citizens wouldn't be caught dead in this country, unless of course they actually visit America and have an accident that lands them in the U.S. health care system.

Personally, I opted out of the American health care system long ago. I'm a holistic nutritionist, and I exercise, eat right, get lots of sunshine and gorge on superfoods and raw berries. I have no need for a doctor, or a pharmaceutical, or a health insurance policy. I don't get annual physical exams, and I have zero risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes or other common health conditions. (I posted my health statistics at www.HealthRanger.org if you want to see my blood workup.)

At the same time, I realize that not everybody is in such a fortunate health position. Most people simply don't take care of their own health, and while I could argue for days about the need for more patient responsibility alongside corporate responsibility, the fact is that relentless advertising from drug companies and food manufacturers has bred a mindset of disease, junk food consumption, pharmaceutical dependence and patient victimization. We have a health crisis in this country, and it's going to take genuinely radical reforms to turn this around and save America from a financial wipeout exacerbated by runaway health care spending.

SiCKO is a must-see documentary

2007-10-15T06:09:00.001-07:00

SiCKO creator Michael Moore answers that all-important question in his best documentary yet. Forget whatever criticism you may have heard about SiCKO -- this is a Michael Moore masterpiece: A courageous, impactful and outrageous documentary that exposes the arrogance of modern medicine and the utter failure of America's corporate-controlled sick care system to provide decent health care to the people. Watching this movie will leave you either steaming mad or shedding tears (or both). It reveals the deep-rooted corruption in America's health care system and explains why the whole system was actually designed to deny health care to the American people.

I've been ranting about America's health care failures for years, and as I've consistently stated to the amazement of some, the health care corporations actually have a plan to keep people sick. There's no money in preventing disease, especially in the cancer industry. Click here to read my recent report on the American Cancer Society's refusal to help prevent 77% of all cancers using affordable, scientifically-proven vitamin D supplements.

In SiCKO, what Moore does very effectively is tells this story to a mass audience, weaving together the emotionally-charged stories of American citizens who lost husbands, daughters and other family members to preventable disease, all thanks to intentional, well-planned payment denials by health insurance companies. In one segment in the film, he features archival footage of former President Nixon, who strongly approves of a new 1970's health care concept called the "HMO" where the more patients are denied health care services, the more money the hospitals and health insurance companies rake in!

In contrast to all this, Moore shows us the universal health care systems in countries like Canada, the UK, France and even Cuba... all countries where health care is free to everyone. It's called universal health care (or "socialized medicine"), and it's a system followed by nearly every modern nation in the world... and even some not-so-modern nations. Only America practices medicine in the Dark Ages, tied to a hopelessly corrupt system of financial exploitation and monopoly price controls, where Big Pharma gets richer, the FDA gets more powerful, and the American people get the shaft.

See my CounterThink cartoon, The Disease Economy, for a visual representation of this mess we're in, or read my book Natural Health Solutions and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing About Them to see just how evil and corrupt our modern health care system really is.

SiCKO is a health care documentary every American must see

2007-10-15T06:08:00.000-07:00

America's disastrous health care system is heaving the country head-first into near-certain economic collapse. Just about everybody's either financially strained or going broke due to spiraling health care costs: the people, the employers, state governments and even the federal government. Multinational corporations are fleeing the United States due to health care costs, taking jobs and economic productivity with them. Meanwhile, 50 percent of personal bankruptcies in the U.S. are due to medical expenses.

But not everybody's doing badly. The drug companies, surgeons, medical specialists, health insurance companies and private hospitals are making out like bandits, raking in multi-million dollar CEO salaries and -- I'm not making this up -- greater than 500,000% markups on prescription drugs. And while the American people get sicker, the drug companies, insurance companies and many health "care" providers (it's really more like "sick care providers") are rolling in cash. Drug companies are now among the richest corporations in the world, and they got there by inventing fictitious diseases, then selling drugs to people who mostly don't need them. See my CounterThink cartoon, Disease Mongers, Inc. to learn more about this topic.

Meanwhile, the American people are the most diseased people in the world among advanced nations. We spend more on health care than anyone, we pay the highest prices for medications, and we're constantly told that we have the best medical technology in the world. But if our health care system is really so good, why do 50 million Americans have no health insurance? Why are hospitals literally dumping uninsured patients on the street, abandoning the sick to protect profits while our politicians actually negotiate on behalf of Big Pharma to make sure Americans keep paying the highest prices in the world for medications? (Click here to see our CounterThink cartoon on President Bush's price negotiations with drug companies.)

What's wrong with America's health care system?

The health insurance disaster continues

2007-10-15T05:18:00.001-07:00

As current headlines show, even when a group of politicians promise their best (and actually mean it!), the result can still be disastrous. Two years later, Shawn Hegdal still has no health insurance.

Neither do 44 million other Americans, and the problem is getting much, much worse. The current proposals on the table simply won't work, and there's far too much at stake from insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, doctors' groups and hospitals to actually conduct real reform. Because real reform would restructure health care from scratch and eliminate the 70% waste that keeps a lot of people employed.

Because of these reasons (and others), health care reform can never happen from within. The stakeholders have too much sway over the politicians writing the laws. And that's why it's only gotten worse in this country. Today, the U.S. health care system is the laughing stock of the world. Canada has a system that's basically affordable. Taiwan has a far better system than our own, and Eastern European countries like Romania even manage basic health care better than we do.

The fact is, health insurance gaps will continue to widen until we decide to get real about health care and cut all the paper pushers and prescription drug profiteering out of the loop. But today, it's exactly the paper pushers and Big Pharma companies who are calling the shots. And why? Because it's profitable -- and too many politicians are beholden to drug money in order to get reelected.

Health insurance costs continue to spiral out of control

2007-10-15T05:16:00.001-07:00

Health insurance costs for employers continue to climb at an outrageous pace. We all know that. But what's the cause? Although almost nobody will admit it, there are really three primary causes of spiraling health care costs.

1. Drug company profiteering. They're doing everything they can to squeeze profits out of U.S. consumers, including banning drugs from Canada, delaying the approval of generics and trying to monopolize the markets.

2. Paper pushers. Around 70% of all costs in a typical clinic or hospital is due to paper pushing. Armies of people sit around filing papers with various insurance companies and government agencies, trying to get paid. It's a huge waste, and doctors could deliver health care for pennies on the dollar if they didn't have to deal with health insurance companies.

3. Patients don't take care of themselves. Health care costs are high because patients refuse to exercise. They won't get off the couch and exercise even 5 minutes a day. They won't stop eating ice cream and chugging soft drinks. They won't follow the basic rules of good nutrition. They don't get much sunlight. The list goes on and on.

Put all this together and you have a health care crisis that's only going to get worse. But of course, nobody wants to admit these are the real problems. Patients, in particular, are quick to blame the government for not giving them enough free prescription drugs when the real problem is that patients have abused their own bodies from the very beginning.

More Employees Was Unable To Receive Health Insurance Coverage Through Their Employers; Prevention, Not Disease Treatment, Is The Answer

2007-10-15T05:15:00.001-07:00

A new study from the Washington, D.C. based Center for Studying Health System Change has revealed that 9 million Americans no longer have health insurance coverage through their employers compared to those who received coverage in 2001. In other words, employers' ability to provide health insurance coverage for their employees is in a rapid decline, leaving employees either without health insurance or needing to look elsewhere. It's a growing trend, and this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

The problem, by the way, is not that employers don't want to provide health insurance to employees, nor that employers are just skimming profits in order to lower their costs. The problem is that health insurance is unaffordable to both employees and their employers, and the root cause behind that is that insurance costs are being driven up by several things: outrageous profits in prescription drugs, the widespread pursuit of unnecessary surgical procedures that are extremely expensive, and the fact that even though western medicine is the most expensive form of medicine in the world, it is one of the least effective at actually preventing chronic disease.

In other words, as a nation, we are not investing in prevention, and as a result, health care costs are sharply rising and health insurance costs are following suit. The result of all of this is that if the trends don't change, we will soon be a nation without readily available health care coverage, but with skyrocketing rates of chronic disease and unaffordable health care costs.

The pharmaceutical companies, for their part, aren't helping the situation. They are continuing their attempts to work together with the FDA to monopolize the U.S. drug market by prohibiting drugs from Canada and other countries. They continue to sharply increase the prices of their drugs and promote them with distorted scientific studies, outright bribery to physicians, and highly misleading marketing and advertising that inevitably results in higher drug sales.

Health insurance companies aren't helping the situation either, but they can only do so much. When health care costs go up, health insurance companies must raise their rates accordingly. Over the last five years, we've seen alarming increases in health insurance rates, and employers can only absorb so much cost before they have to start cutting these benefits. The situation has gotten so bad that today, as the president of Arial Software, I've received resumes from people who said they would work for practically any pay whatsoever, as long as they could get guaranteed health insurance coverage. I view this as a sad situation, and an indication that our health care system is utterly broken. Western medicine is a complete failure in terms of enhancing the health of our nation and preventing chronic disease.

The only way out of all this is to invest in prevention and move to a national health care system that follows free market principles, and allows health care providers to purchase prescription drugs from around the world rather than limiting them to monopolized U.S. sources.

But prescription drugs are never the answer, anyway. The real answer to all this is prevention, and as a nation, we don't invest in prevention. We need a system that teaches people how to be healthy from the time they are a young child all the way through adulthood. We need a system that rewards and incentivizes healthy eating habits, healthy exercise, and healthy choices in daily life. We need a system that teaches and preaches self-care rather than care through chemicals and prescription drugs. We need to teach people how to regain strength and flexibility and cardiovascular fitness. We also need a system that supports the patient's own immune system rather than trying to destroy it through barbaric therapies like chemotherapy.

Obviously, we need a lot of changes in our health care system in order to make health care insurance affordable to both employees and employers. Until that happens, the situation is only going to get worse. You can expect more and more Americans to go without health insurance in the years ahead until this issue is addressed and we ultimately see a true revolution in modern medicine.

The health insurance problem is not an insurance problem, but it is a health problem

2007-10-15T05:14:00.001-07:00

Health insurance reform needs to focus on the health, not the insurance, because you can never solve a problem by shifting paperwork to another party or bu denying services to an ever-expanding group of people. It's similar to the way in which the federal government wants to solve social security: just keep raising the qualification age until it's so high that almost nobody lives that long. How's that for security? "If you live long enough, we'll even pay you back all the money you worked for!"

In the realm of health insurance, we need to start talking about disease prevention. The only way we're going to lower the costs in the long run is if we make our population healthier. And the only way we're going to make people healthier is if we start admitting the truth about the detrimental health effects of prescription drugs, processed foods, junk foods, soft drinks, lack of physical exercise and so on, and then start educating people about how to take control of their health and reduce their risk of ever experiencing chronic disease. That's how you solve the health insurance problem: by making people healthy. What a novel idea, huh?

Right now people are getting all the wrong messages about their health. They are being told that unhealthy foods are good for them. The FDA has approved health claims that mislead consumers into thinking things like sugary oatmeal is good for your heart because it contains oats. It's a ridiculous claim. And yet the legitimate food claims -- like olive oil prevents breast cancer, garlic prevents cancer, raw nuts prevent heart disease -- are not allowed at all. In fact, those are outlawed by the FDA. So today we have a regulatory environment that actually prevents people from learning the truth about foods that could help prevent disease. Thank goodness the FDA is protecting us from all those dangerous health claims!

When was the last time the FDA ever allowed the claim that blueberries reduce LDL cholesterol? You'll never see that claim because the blueberry companies aren't going to engage in the corruption, bribery, and political influence that would normally be required for the FDA to approve something. Blueberries are just blueberries. They are straight from nature. They are healthy. And they actually lower bad cholesterol and improve cardiovascular health regardless of whether or not the FDA allows such a claim.

Getting back to health insurance, you have to remember that the health insurance business is just that – a business. There are a lot of people making money pushing paper, providing unnecessary medical procedures to the public and selling prescription drugs over and over again to people who are undoubtedly suffering from downright fatal side effects from the long-term consumption of such drugs. It's big business and thus there is no real financial incentive for anyone to reform the way health insurance works right now. Let's face it: sick people generate revenues. It doesn't mean there's some evil conspiracy behind it all, it just means that there's no financial incentive to teach people how to be healthy.

Who makes money if people get healthier? Well, nobody does! The only people who benefit from widespread health are the individuals themselves. In fact, billions of dollars in profits would be lost by Big Pharma if the country were suddenly swept up by a wave of health. So don't look for any serious health insurance or health care reform in your lifetime. Nearly every public discussion about these topics is nothing but sleight of hand designed to distract you from the real problem, which is the disease-care industry and food & beverage industries that have no incentive to help people get healthier.

Here's a final question in all of this: Why is it that other countries can provide meaningful, full coverage health insurance for their entire population at the equivalent of about $25/month? Of course, I am referring to Taiwan. A country that provides full service health coverage for only $25/month. And that includes maternity care, dental care, everything! And it's the same $25 whether you're 16 or 60, regardless of your health history. You can't be disqualified as long as you're a Taiwan citizen.

Yet in the United States, some people are being charged $1000 per month for only partial coverage. Why is that? Because health insurance is extremely inefficient. Probably 80-90% of the money that goes into health insurance is falling into the pockets of people who do nothing but push paper around. It's not going to the bottom line services that people really need. And virtually none of it is going to disease prevention education or public advertising campaigns that would inform people about how to take charge of their own health and prevent chronic disease.

So all of this money is just going down a black hole. It's utterly wasted. And today, the money spent on health care comprises a significant portion of G&P. Something like $1 out of every $4 spent in this country is spent on health care. We've also just learned that 50% of all personal bankruptcies in the United States are caused by medical bills. Think about that for a moment: the disease-care industry is bankrupting our families and our nation. Only a fool would think the answer is to introduce a drug discount card or some other such nonsense. That's like tossing a cup of water on a raging house fire.

We don't need to be spending 25% of our G&P on health insurance and health care services. What we should be doing is spending something like 3% of the G&P on disease prevention and education. If we were to do that, within one generation we could slash our health care costs to perhaps 1/20th of what we're spending today. And that would bring a significant enhancement in quality of life for everyone.

If you want to pay off the national debt, take the money you would save from health care and pay down the national debt with it. The quality of life would go up, the debt would go down, and within a generation, we could be a nation of healthy, debt-free individuals, rather than the nation we are now, which is regrettably the most diseased population in the history of the world combined with the greatest national debt ever witnessed in the history of the United States of America.

It took some real short-term thinking to put us in this mess. And it's going to take some tough choices to pull us out of it. Frankly, I'm not sure the politicians and voters have the will to make any tough choices at all. As long as their drugs are paid for by insurance, and as long as Medicare covers Viagra, they're sufficiently sedated to prevent any real cry for reform.

That's part of what prescription drugs really accomplish, by the way: the keep the population doped up in a never-ending state of brain fog from which it is impossible to rally enough people to demand real reform. Think about it: according to a new study published in The Lancet, the Vioxx drug alone seems to have killed as many as 60,000 Americans. Where's the outcry? Where are the demonstrations? The marches on Washington? The declaration of war against Big Pharma? If terrorists killed 60,000 Americans, we'd be bombing yet another nation into dust. If an herb killed 60,000 Americans, the FDA would be screaming about how we have to regulate all herbs to "protect the people!" If a virus killed 60,000 Americans, we'd call it one of the worst outbreaks since the 1918 bird flu outbreak.

But when a prescription drug kills 60,000 people, the FDA is all but silent. The CEO of a drug company warns us not to "overreact." The newspaper headlines dedicate their space to the Michael Jackson trial. The politicians argue about whether cell phones should be banned on the road. And, don't forget, the Superbowl is coming, too! Apparently, there are a lot more important things on the minds of Americans than the fact that 60,000 of their family members, neighbors and loved ones have been killed by just one drug. And hundreds of thousands more are killed each year by other drugs, medical mistakes, failed surgical procedures and the like.

What kind of society has this become anyway? Has this population been so dumbed down, doped up and brainwashed by pharma-funded TV advertisements that it can't see the crimes against humanity taking place right before our very eyes? We get front-page news and priority cable coverage when twelve people die in a train wreck. But when 5,000 times as many people die from a prescription drug, there's no news coverage at all. Silence.

And you know why? Because it all happens quietly. In hospital beds, family rooms, and ambulances. Each victim slips away quietly, and their death certificate gets recorded with the phrase, "natural causes." There's no footage to show on the evening news. No sound bite. No wreckage. No explosion. No guided missiles or embedded war footage. So it isn't newsworthy, apparently.

And, of course, there's the fact that most of the news organizations in this country are beholden to the drug companies for their financial lifeline (advertising). Don't discount the power of half a billion dollars to influence the day's news. What news organization would possibly want to expose the pharmaceutical catastrophe and risk angering their top advertisers?

In looking at what's really happening today, I'm astonished. It's beyond outrage, really. I'm just astonished that people will take this treatment and think of it as normal. Maybe it's the fluoride in the water supply. Maybe it's the brain-busting hydrogenated oils in the foods, or the MSG found throughout every grocery store in the country. Maybe it's all the TV programming. Or maybe you, me, and a handful of other people who read this site have been time-warped into bizarro world where all the laws of sanity have been reversed, and someone put the most insane people of all in charge.

Uninsured gap widens, 46.6 million Americans now have no health insurance

2007-10-15T05:12:00.001-07:00

New census data shows that although the average American household earned more money last year, an additional 1.3 million citizens became uninsured, pushing the total number of Americans without health insurance to 46.6 million.

The percentage of uninsured in the United States in 2005 -- 15.9 percent -- was the highest since 1998, with poverty rates staying steady at 12.6 percent.

Households with incomes between $25,000 and $75,000 were hit the hardest by skyrocketing health insurance costs. 2005 saw the numbers of people with health insurance grow by 1.4 million, but the uninsured ranks also swelled by 1.3 million.

"We're going to continue to see a million-plus added to the (uninsured) rolls every year," says Kathleen Stoll, health policy director for the consumer advocacy group Families USA. Stoll says businesses will find it more and more difficult to offer health coverage to employees as insurance prices continue to rise.

"Skyrocketing health insurance costs threaten to bankrupt our economy," warns Mike Adams, consumer health advocate. "The profiteering prices of prescription drugs, combined with a near-total lack of disease prevention efforts, are creating what I call a 'disease economy' -- an economy that will soon be spending one out of every four dollars to manage diseases that could be prevented for nearly nothing," he says.

Many U.S. workers are forced to go without insurance in spite of health plans offered by employers because deductibles and premiums -- which employees must pay before coverage goes into effect -- are on the rise.

"It's the out-of-pocket costs," says Stoll. "If you add that deductible on top of premiums, it becomes a tough choice."

Though Medicaid has covered growing numbers of uninsured in past years -- particularly children without insurance -- the government-funded health plan did not significantly increase its coverage in 2005, leaving an additional 400,000 children without health insurance.

Nine million children left uninsured by America's health care system

2007-10-15T05:10:00.000-07:00

This is a bad news for USA children.

A report by Families USA -- prepared for the Campaign for Children's Health Care -- found that most of the United States' 9 million children without health insurance live in two-parent families with at least one working parent.

One parent or both parents either have jobs that do not offer health insurance, or they do not make enough money to afford any coverage their employer might offer, the report found.

California has the highest number of uninsured children at 1.3 million, according to the report, even though California allows families who make as much as 250 percent of the poverty level (about $41,000 a year for a family of three) to enroll in the State Children's Health Insurance Program, the federal- and state-sponsored plan to help insure people who make too much to qualify for Medicare.

According to the Families USA report, many states have frozen their SCHIP plans to save money, which means even eligible children cannot be enrolled in the program. On top of that, SCHIP faces a funding shortfall of almost $1 billion for fiscal year 2007 when it is up for reauthorization by Congress next year.

The other problem is that, while almost two-thirds of uninsured children qualify for some form of government-sponsored insurance program, many families do not know about them or are discouraged by the complex regulations that come with signing up, said Andy Schneider, a senior advisor at low-income-family advocacy group the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Another portion of uninsured children fall through the cracks because their families make too much to qualify for Medicare but still too little to afford private coverage.

The difficulty of obtaining health insurance creates a vicious circle, as high health care prices prompt families to wait until the last possible moment to seek treatment for an ailment, which, in turn, drives up the cost of health care.

A number of activists and members of Congress say that help is on the political horizon, suggesting that Democrats will push harder for universal health care coverage if they win a congressional majority in November.

"I think you're seeing some real pressure building as fewer and fewer people are getting employment-based benefits," said Rep. Pete Stark, D-Fremont, who has introduced legislation to provide health insurance to all children by 2012. "I'm sensing a strong feeling throughout the country that we need to get health care for all."

Surveys Find That Health care costs are bankrupting employers, employees

2007-10-15T05:09:00.000-07:00

Americans are growing increasingly dissatisfied with the health insurance costs of the employer-sponsored health care system, according to the annual Health Confidence Survey.

The survey found that overall dissatisfaction with health insurance costs increased from 33 percent last year to 52 percent, with most of the frustration being caused by rising costs. Of the 1,000 people surveyed, 30 percent consider the system poor, 28 percent consider it fair, and 10 percent would rate it as very good. Sixty percent of respondents reported that their health insurance costs went up last year, and 28 percent said that those costs had impaired their ability to pay for housing, heat and food. Only 77 percent of those surveyed were covered by a company health plan -- down from 81 percent in 2001 -- and 75 percent of respondents said they would rather have a company health plan than a pay raise of $6,700, which is the average cost for a company to cover an individual worker. Thirteen percent said no pay raise would be big enough to get them to part with employer coverage.

"There is a continuing shift," said Dallas L. Salisbury, President of the Employee Benefit Research Institute. "Even some of the companies in the unionized sector have introduced cost-sharing for the first time ever. Employees who were paying nothing are now paying something, and those who were paying something are paying more."

"We will reach the 'tipping point' very soon, said columnist Blake Fleetwood on his Huffington Post blog. "Not only because people are needlessly dying, but because big and small business are being hobbled by astronomical health costs."

Fleetwood notes that the rising health care costs have all but slain the American giants of employment, such as General Motors and Ford, both of which are reporting losses due to health care costs. The best bet for both companies, Fleetwood said, would be to move production to Canada, where the Government would pay for most of their health care costs.

"We're spending more on health care and less on the auto business, and frankly that does not work," said John Devine, GMs chief financial officer. "A system that has relied solely on the back of U.S. business I don't think is going to be sustainable."

Fleetwood said the relationship between health care insurance and employers is almost exclusive to the United States, caused by companies offering free health insurance and tax-free premiums instead of higher wages during World War II wage and price constraints. In Canada, private employers spend about 2.8 percent of the gross domestic product on health care, whereas U.S. employers spend around 7.7 percent. Most employers outside the United States can rely on a taxpayer-sponsored single payer health care system.

Fleetwood said that 47 million Americans are totally uninsured, and the subsequent lack of medical care causes needless deaths every year, which he surmises is why the United States is 37th in overall health system performance, including infant and adult mortality and life expectancy.

"The U.S. Health system looks especially dysfunctional when you consider how much money we spend per capita -- more than $6,000 per year for health care, twice as much as any other country -- and how little we get for it," Fleetwood said. "No wonder people are unhappy."

"It's not difficult to see where all this is going," said Mike Adams, a consumer health advocate and critic of Western health care practices. "As long as Western medicine ignores real prevention and focuses primarily on a drugs-and-surgery approach to managing disease symptoms, health care costs will continue to rise, eroding the global competitiveness of U.S. businesses and ultimately burdening the U.S. economy with a financial load it cannot bear.

"Health care costs will ultimately bankrupt this nation," he said.

Smokers should pay more for health insurance

2007-10-15T05:06:00.000-07:00

A new survey published this week indicates that most Americans believe smokers and the obese should pay more for health insurance. However, those surveyed were unsure how to assist the millions of citizens who currently have no health insurance.

More than 1,500 people were surveyed for the study, and of that number, 80 percent believe that the health care system in the U.S. needs to be fixed. It is estimated that approximately 46 million Americans currently have no health insurance. The study also indicated that 60 percent of those surveyed indicated favoring higher insurance premiums for smokers while 30 percent favored higher premiums for the obese.

The report stated "When it comes to personal responsibility, consumers increasingly support making people pay more for unhealthy behavior." The survey was released a week after Democrats -- who are generally in favor of more government intervention into the lives of uninsured citizens -- won control of both houses of the U.S. Congress.

The health insurance industry unexpectedly began to support a plan for universal health insurance for American citizens earlier this week. With nearly 16 percent of Americans now uninsured, the rate has been rising for years as prices for prescription drugs and hospital care have escalated.

Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, said that about 20 percent of large employers already give insurance discounts to non-smoking workers, and that this stance is rapidly growing in popularity -- with Darling indicating that it will continue to grow faster.

Darling added that, in regards to obesity, "I think it will be a while before we get to the point where people begin tying a financial discount to something like BMI (body mass index)." When asked about the government's role in a type of universal health insurance, Darling added that "Our view is that it has to be shared responsibility; the government is going to have to pay" with the other half of the responsibility going to taxpayers, according to Darling.

So ... Are you a smokers ???

Know What to Look Out For Insurance

2007-10-15T05:04:00.000-07:00

Small business insurance varies greatly in cost. Around thirty five hundred ponuds a year is average. Small business insurance providers are likely to change your van insurance quote based on the size of your business. This is determined by looking at how many employees you have, how much sales you do, and how risky the insurance company feels that you will be to insure.

Be sure to ask your agent to explain all the insurance categories that you might choose. Otherwise, you could risk being lumped in with other businesses that aren't suitable. Network installers and resellers are, for instance, very different from software developers, but risk being categorized with them if their business is not properly explained to the agent.

Each subcontractor you work with should also maintain both professional and general liability insurance, as well as errors and omissions coverage. Your insurance policy is unlikely to cover them. If you are covering them, realize that you are providing benefits similar to those given to an employee, rather than those usually provided to a contractor. Most people hire contractors to save money, so this is worth considering.

Be sure to talk to both your attorney and insurance agent when you apply for a business van insurance quote. This is especially true if you already have an existing agent for property and contents insurance policies. You may also wish to consult with your accountant to find out what sort of small business van insurance you will be able to afford.

Putting a price tag on your insurance policy

2007-10-15T05:03:00.001-07:00

Crawford tells clients that disability insurance premiums will typically cost between 1 percent and 3 percent of annual income. Prices will vary according to several main factors, including your age, gender, health history and occupation.

Another factor affecting your premiums is the policy's elimination period. That's a specified length of time -- people usually choose 90 days -- from the onset date of disability. When that time is up, the company starts paying your benefits. You can choose an elimination period as short as 30 days or as long as 720 days. Generally, the longer your elimination period is, the cheaper your premium.

You'll also have to choose a benefit period, or the length of time the insurer will pay you benefits. Most companies let you choose between benefits lasting two years, five years, all the way to age 65, to age 67, or for the rest of your life. Most people choose the age-65 option, as Social Security kicks in thereafter. The longer your benefit period, the more expensive your policy will be.

When they price your policy, each insurer categorizes you according to its own set of occupation classes, ranking systems that sort different jobs according to their likelihood of filing a claim. The more likely your occupation is to result in disability, the more expensive your coverage will be.

And if you work at a job that requires intense manual labor, like construction work, it's likely you'll be unable to get coverage at one of the big disability insurers, Crawford said.

"You'll have to go to a smaller insurer. They won't make you necessarily pay more for coverage, but you'll get a stripped-down contract, without any bells and whistles," he said.

Well .. Do you need it?

2007-10-15T05:01:00.000-07:00

"Most people say, I don't need disability coverage -- I've already got it through work," said Crawford. But most company-issued disability insurance only provides you with 60 percent of your salary and sets a monthly maximum of $5,000 to $10,000, which can be even less than 60 percent of a highly compensated employee's salary.

That is one chase with some people.

But here's the problem: Those benefits are also fully taxable, which means you're actually getting a lot less than 60 percent of what you're used to.

"You could easily find yourself trying to survive on about 40 percent of your salary -- or less, if you're a high wage earner -- if you don't buy a supplemental policy," Crawford said.

And Social Security probably won't cover you, either -- Social Security disability benefits are one of the most difficult benefits to qualify for, Crawford said. "You have to be completely disabled for at least a year, with no hope of recovery," he said. "Even when you meet those requirements, you're unlikely to receive more than $2,000 a month."

Shopping for policies that make the grade

Look for company strength. The first question you need to ask is whether the insurance company you're eyeing is financially sound, said Crawford.

"There are maybe six major insurance companies left that still offer disability insurance," he said. "There are lots of smaller companies that offer disability insurance, but you should check their financial statements. Make sure they look like they'll be able to pay out claims as time goes by."

To check insurance company ratings, check moodys.com, standardandpoors.com or ambest.com.

Aim for a non-cancelable contract. Next on your checklist is renewability, or whether your policy's terms are subject to change over time. There are three options: a non-cancelable and guaranteed renewable policy, a guaranteed renewable policy, and a conditionally renewable policy.

Experts say the non-cancelable contract, especially if price is not an issue, is by far the best of the three. That's because it locks in your rates and benefits. The insurance company can't make changes unless you request them.

A guaranteed renewable policy is less desirable. After you invest in a policy, your insurer doesn't have the right to drop you, said Susan Baker, manager of DI sales and marketing for Berkshire Life Insurance, but they reserve the right to raise prices for specific reasons.

"All the companies that are writing guaranteed renewable contracts used to write non-cancelable contracts," said Crawford. "They often say the two are the same, but they're not. There's a reason why they're leaving themselves the back door open."

Finally, avoid conditionally renewable policies. An insurer can put any condition on them or raise rates at any time.

Look for a broad definition of "total disability." The most consumer-friendly definition of total disability is "own-occupation disability." If you are disabled and cannot perform the principal duties of the job you currently have, you get paid your disability benefit even if you can do some other tasks.

"Even if they become disabled, most people want to keep working," said Crawford. "The neat thing about own-occupation coverage is that you're not penalized for working at the flower shop down the street, even if you can't yet go back to your full-time job."

The most conservative definition of total disability is "any-occupation disability." Under this definition you do not get a benefit unless you are completely unemployed and unable to do any work.

Many companies, of course, will define "disability" in shades of gray between own-occupation and any-occupation disability. And some disability insurance products will give you own-occupation coverage for a specified period, then move you to a modified plan, increasingly contingent on whether you can produce any income.

Buy residual or partial disability coverage. A third of Northwestern Mutual's claims are for partial disability coverage, said Meridee Maynard, vice president of disability income products at the company.

Insurers pay partial disability benefits if you can only work at your job for a reduced period of time. After an accident, for example, someone might leave work entirely for six months, then work on a reduced schedule for the next year. If working part-time meant the person lost a percentage of his income, partial disability coverage would kick in and pay a proportionate benefit.

Get the appropriate riders. If you have disability coverage, you may not use it for decades -- if ever -- and $3,000 a month in ten years will buy you considerably less than it does now. You might want to buy a rider that adjusts your policy for inflation, particularly if you're in your 20s and 30s, said Baker.

Another option to consider is what Baker terms a "future purchase option" – it allows you to buy more coverage as your salary rises or your business expands. This is especially good for people just starting their careers.

The Rolling Out 2007's Top Fuel Efficient New Cars For Insurance.com

2007-10-15T04:59:00.000-07:00

Car dealerships in autumn are like toy stores at Christmas - so many new vehicles, all sorts of colors and features - it makes you want to run out and buy a 2007 new car immediately. And while many of us typically cannot afford to buy a new car every year, this year's class of cars just might have you reevaluating the efficiency of your current gas guzzling machine.

Could 2007 Be The Year of The Fuel Efficient Cars?
To help ease the blow of rising gas prices, automobile manufacturers took a different approach for 2007 by designing a wide range of vehicles that provide consumers with all the features they have come to appreciate in a car - with the fuel efficiency they desire. And no, these new 2007 cars are not small, non-driver friendly cars - they are vehicles that appeal to the masses, such as luxury models, fun-loving SUVs, family sedans and hybrids.

2007 New Cars
To help you start shopping, or dream shopping at least, we've provided a list below highlighting some of the new 2007 models, their features and what category each automobile falls into so you can find the ideal vehicle for you.

Crossovers

GMC Acadia - The first crossover SUV from GMC, the Acadia offers seating for up to eight and combines the capability of an SUV with the smooth, responsiveness of a car. Plus, the Acadia offers an established 17 mpg on city driving and 25 mpg on the highway for FWD models and an estimated 17 mpg and 24 mpg for AWD models.
Saturn Outlook - Equipped with GM's Smart Slide feature for easy-access seating, the Outlook provides more legroom for taller passengers, three row seating and 19.7 cubic foot of cargo space. This is ideal for drivers who require a lot of space for groceries or sporting equipment.

SUVs

Saturn VUE Green Line Hybrid - Based on the 2006 Saturn VUE, the VUE Green Line provides drivers with all the amenities of an SUV and an estimated fuel efficiency of 27 mpg for city driving and 32 mpg on the highway.
Mercury Mariner Hybrid - This environmentally safe SUV offers consumers a little more fun for 2007 with a new "Moon and Tune" package which includes a power moonroof, roof rack, satellite radio and an in-dash six-CD changer. Great for drivers that like to feel the warmth of the sun on their backs while driving and to be able to see the beauty of the stars at night.

Sedans

Nissan Altima Hybrid - Developed for drivers that have come to value Nissan's spirited performance and distinctive exterior design, the Altima Hybrid offers a spacious interior and a powerful 4-cylinder engine for ultimate comfort and performance. However, this Hybrid Sedan is only available for new car buyers in California, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island, Maine and New Jersey.
Toyota Camry Hybrid - A favorite among many drivers, the 2007 Toyota Camry is the third in the family of Toyota Hybrids. This full hybrid incorporates Toyota's Synergy Drive with a fuel efficiency of 43 mpg in the city and 38 mpg on the highway - a step up from the standard Camry model.
Honda Accord Hybrid - Packed with a 253-hp, 3.0-liter, i-VTEC® V-6 engine, the Honda Accord Hybrid offers the same command and authority of the fuel driven sibling Honda Accord. Plus, the 2007 engine is more fuel efficient than ever before with an estimated 28 mpg in the city and 35 mpg on the highway.

Luxury Vehicles

Mercedes-Benz E320 BLUETEC - Powered by the cleanest-burning diesel engine in the world, this luxurious sedan comes with a DeNox storage catalytic converter that helps cut down on the nitrogen-oxide emissions emitted into the air. However, due to strict emission laws, the BLUETEC is not available for sale in California and New York.
Lexus Hybrid - Goes from zero to 60 in 5.2 seconds; this elegant Hybrid provides amenities, craftsmanship and technology Lexus owners have come to appreciate. It also comes with a nickel-metal hydride battery that is so advanced you never have to plug in the vehicle to charge the battery - now that's a fuel and energy efficient car!

So if any of these sleek new 2007 cars have you thinking about trading in your money draining gasoline vehicle, then visit Insurance.com's auto insurance comparison application first before you buy. Here you will be able to evaluate multiple rates from best-in-class insurance providers, which will help you find the best car and auto insurance rate for your budget.

The Consequences If We Do Not Having Auto Insurance

2007-10-15T04:56:00.000-07:00

There are so many thing of consequences if we don't have Auto Insurance.

When young adults graduate college they have aspirations of starting their first "real world" job, getting their own place and buying a brand new car - one that does not need a screwdriver to start. However, college students are also graduating with much more than just a college degree and a dream, they are graduating with a substantial amount of debt. In fact, many students graduate with an average of $3,262 in credit card debt - 10 percent of that group owing more than $7,000 in credit card charges.

Students forget to factor in other life costs, such as health care, 401K deductions, income taxes, car payments, auto insurance, rent, utility bills, student loans, credit card bills and food expenses into their monthly budget. "After you graduate and land your first job, you do not think about having to pay for all of these expenses," stated a graduate from Ohio University. "Unfortunately, reality sets in pretty fast and you realize you do not have the money to make ends meet - it is a hard lesson to learn!"

College Debt
Why is there so much credit card debt among college students? "Many credit card companies set up kiosks on college campuses offering free pizzas and t-shirts to try and entice students to sign up for a credit card," noted David Roush, CEO of Insurance.com. "The problem is many college students do not have the income or financial knowledge to manage a credit card - a problem that is leading students into a lifetime of financial despair."

In addition to the outrageous credit card bills, students are also graduating with student loans ranging from $10,000 to $52,000 or more. Often students figure they will be able to pay everything off once they get a job and start making "real" money, but that simply is not the case.

Not only are credit card and student loan bills financially crippling to many new graduates, it is also forcing grads to cut back on other necessary expenses, such as auto insurance - one bill you legally cannot drive without! "Driving without auto insurance is illegal in all 50 states, however, many young adults elect to go without auto insurance because they think they cannot afford to have it," stated Roush. "A scary thought when 15.3% of all automobile accidents are caused by drivers between the ages of 20 - 24."

While deciding not to pay for auto insurance may seem like a good idea at the time, graduates are not considering the expense of getting caught without auto insurance or the cost of getting into an automobile accident. "Imagine if you had to pay the medical bills of someone who gets injured in car accident when you are at fault - suddenly paying for car insurance does not seem so bad," says Roush.

The Penalty of Driving Without Auto Insurance
According to the Insurance Information Institute, the cost of driving without auto insurance can vary from state to state, depending on the percentage of drivers who are uninsured in that state. For instance, in Massachusetts residents can be charged anywhere from $500 to $5,000 in fines and receive a one-year jail sentence. In Florida, Louisiana, Connecticut and New Jersey, drivers operating a vehicle without the state required minimum will have their vehicles impounded - which can cost you thousands depending on how long it takes you to get your car out.

To find out the auto insurance state minimum and fines and penalties for driving without insurance in your state, visit the Department of Motor Vehicles' website.

How to Budget For Auto Insurance
As you look for auto insurance, make sure to check if the insurer offers a 6-month or 12-month payment plan to help you manage your auto insurance payments better. In addition, many auto insurance providers offer a variety of discounts, including alumni discounts. So make sure to ask if your college or university is eligible for a discount, because every bit helps when you are first starting out on your own.

To help make researching auto insurance rates easier, Insurance.com offers an auto insurance comparison application. Here, you will be able to evaluate multiple rates from best-in-class insurance providers - helping you find the best auto insurance coverage for your newly graduated budget.

Read This Simple Steps to Filing Your Car Insurance Claim

2007-10-15T04:26:00.000-07:00

Having even a teeny-tiny car accident can be one of life's least enjoyable moments. Hmm ... it's so bad. But however, accidents happen, and sooner or later, we all have the experience of meeting one of our fellow road travelers up close and personal. Using the following seven steps to filing your claim will help you get over this speed bump as smoothly as possible.

They aren’t really accidents. They are more of an incident. Usually they are an incident that you would like to forget.

Understand your policy before a loss, sit down and carefully read your insurance policy. Call your agent or company if you have any questions about what is or is not covered.
Make sure everyone is okay and check to see if anyone needs medical attention. Even if your injuries are minor, you may still want to have them checked out at a hospital or with your family doctor. Minor injuries can become major, long-lasting injuries.
Exchange information when you are involved in an accident, get the other driver's name, address, phone number, insurance carrier, and insurer's phone number. Be prepared to give the same information about yourself to the other driver. You can find insurers’ telephone numbers on the proof-of-insurance cards that should be carried on your person when operating a motor vehicle.
Identify witnesses and ask witnesses to the accident for their names and phone numbers in case their account of the accident is needed.
File an accident report and contact local law enforcement officers to have an accident report prepared. If law enforcement is not reachable, accident reports and detailed instructions are available at all police departments, sheriff's offices, your local Department of Motor Vehicles office, and on your local Department of Motor Vehicles' web site
Notify your insurer by contacting your insurance company about the accident as soon as possible. An insurance adjuster will review the accident report to determine who caused the accident. If the accident was not your fault, you can have either your insurance company or the at-fault driver's insurance company handle the repair or replacement of your vehicle. If you use the other driver's company, you will not have a claim on your automobile policy and you will not have to pay a deductible.
Do not release insurers too early. Do not relieve your insurance company of its responsibility until the damages are settled to your satisfaction. For example, have your insurance company handle the claim if the other party's insurance company questions its policyholder’s negligence or offers an unacceptable settlement.
Consider these settlement factors.
- Bodily injuries: You may be entitled to a monetary settlement for injuries caused by another at fault (liable) party. It can take several days for some injuries to become apparent.
- Damages: The insurance company is responsible to pay for the reasonable cost of repairs to your vehicle. An insurance adjuster will assess the damage. Usually, insurance companies and auto body shops negotiate disagreements about what should be repaired. If you disagree with their conclusions, you have the right to obtain another appraisal at any auto body shop.
- Appraisal clause: Most auto insurance policies include an appraisal clause, which can be used to help settle disputes about physical damage claims between you and your insurance company. (The appraisal clause does not apply for claims you file with the other party's insurance company.) If you cannot reach an agreement with your company, you or your insurer can initiate the appraisal clause. Your appraiser and your insurer's appraiser then select an independent umpire to try to resolve the dispute. Check your policy or ask your agent or insurance company for more information about the appraisal clause.

And that is it. While filing a claim is certainly no fun, following these seven steps will make the process almost as easy as getting free quotes and purchasing your car insurance at CarInsurance.com.

Important For You About How Much Car Insurance Should You Buy?

2007-10-15T04:24:00.000-07:00

STOP !! Read this article before you Take your Car Insurance.

Car insurance isn’t very exciting. Depending on which state you live in, it could be a smaller or larger piece of your budget than your neighbors across state lines.

How much insurance should you buy? Any insurance agent worthy of their salt will tell you that you should buy as much as you can afford. While this is a good rule of thumb, it's about as useful as a stock broker's tip to buy low and sell high. It might be sound logic but it doesn't get you any closer to an educated decision. There are a few filters that need consideration in order to make that educated decision. First, what is the state required minimum coverage where you live? Second, what does the minimum cover? Third, what other coverage is available and can you afford it? And fourthly, what are you protecting?

What is the minimum for your state?

You can get up to date state minimum requirements by following this link and selecting your state.

State-By-State Requirements (validated June 2006):

State	Type(s) of Coverage Required	Minimum Liability Limits*
AL	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability (effective 6/2000)	20/40/10
AK	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	50/100/25
AZ	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	15/30/10
AR	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/25
CA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	15/30/5
CO	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	25/50/15
CT	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist	20/40/10
DE	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	15/30/5
DC	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/10
FL	Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	0/0/10*
GA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/25
HI	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	20/40/10
ID	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/15
IL	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	20/40/15
IN	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/10
IA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	20/40/15
KS	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/10
KY	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	25/50/10
LA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	10/20/10
ME	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist, UnderinsuredMotorist	50/100/25
MD	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection (may bewailed for policyholder but compulsory for passengers), Uninsured Motorist	20/40/10
MA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	20/40/5
MI	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	20/40/10
MN	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist	30/60/10
MS	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	10/20/5
MO	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/10
MT	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/10
NE	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/25
NV	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	15/30/10
NH	Financial Responsibility Only, Underinsured Motorist	0/0/25*
NJ	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	15/30/5
NM	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/10
NY	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/10
NC	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	30/60/25
ND	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/25
OH	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	12.5/25/7.5
OK	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	10/20/10
OR	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/10
PA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Medical Payments	15/30/5
RI	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/25
SC	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	15/30/10
SD	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/25
TN	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/10
TX	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	20/40/15
UT	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Personal Injury Protection	25/50/15
VT	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist	25/50/10
VA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	25/50/20
WA	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/10
WV	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Uninsured Motorist	20/40/10
WI	Financial Responsibility Only, Uninsured Motorist	0/0/10*
WY	Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability	25/50/20

*The first two figures refer to bodily injury liability limits(which are not required in all states) and the third figure refers to the property damage liability limit. For example, 20/40/10 means coverage up to$20,000 for each person injured in an accident, up to a maximum of $40,000 forth entire accident, and $10,000 worth of coverage for property damage. These state minimums are based on the most current information available. In addition, some states are "no-fault" states which additionally require Personal Injury Protection, a.k.a. PIP. You should check your specific state’s requirements to verify these figures.

What do the minimums cover?

Now that you know what your state requires, what are you actually covered for once you purchase the minimum? Using the coverage definitions that follow, find the types of coverage required and see what your state says is the accepted minimum.

Coverage Definitions

Bodily Injury Liability covers other people's bodily injuries or death for which you are responsible. It also provides for a legal defense if another party in the accident files a lawsuit against you. Claims for bodily injury may be for such things as medical bills, loss of income or pain and suffering. In the event of a serious accident, you want enough insurance to cover a judgment against you in a lawsuit, without jeopardizing your personal assets. Bodily injury liability covers injury to people, not your vehicle. Therefore, it's good idea to have the same level of coverage for all of your cars. Bodily Injury Liability does NOT cover you or other people on your policy. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy.

Comprehensive Physical Damage Coverage Covers your vehicle, and sometimes other vehicles you maybe driving for losses resulting from incidents other than collision. For example, comprehensive insurance covers damage to your car if it is stolen; or damaged by flood, fire, or animals. Pays to fix your vehicle less the deductible you choose. To keep your premiums low, select as high a deductible as you feel comfortable paying out of pocket. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy.

Collision Coverage covers damage to your car when your car hits, or is hit by, another vehicle, or other object. Pays to fix your vehicle less the deductible you choose. To keep your premiums low, select as large a deductible as you feel comfortable paying out of pocket. For older cars, consider dropping this coverage, since coverage is normally limited to the cash value of your car. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy.

Medical Payments covers medical expenses to you and your passengers injured in an accident. There may also be coverage if as a pedestrian a vehicle injures you. Does NOT matter who is at fault. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy.

Uninsured Motorist Coverage covers bodily injuries to you and your passengers when the other person has no insurance or not enough insurance in a crash that is not your fault. In some states, there is also uninsured motorist coverage for damage to your vehicle. Given the large number of uninsured motorists, this is very important coverage to have, even in states with no-fault insurance. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy

Personal Injury Protection Coverage covers within the specified limits, the medical, hospital and funeral expenses of the insured, others in his vehicles and pedestrians struck by him. The basic coverage for the insured's own injuries on first-party basis, without regard to fault. It is only available in certain states.

Property Damage Liability covers you if your car damages someone else's property. Usually it is their car, but it could be a fence, a house or any other property damaged in an accident. It also provides you with legal defense if another party files a lawsuit against you. It is a good idea to purchase enough of this insurance to cover the amount of damage your car might do to another vehicle or object. Coverage is limited to the terms and conditions contained in the policy.

Rental Car Reimbursement covers renting a car if your car isn't drivable or while your car is being repaired because of a covered accident.

What else is available and can you afford it?

Did you come across a coverage and think, "I need that but it isn't required by state law" when you were reviewing the coverage definitions? Chances are you did. Can your budget afford the additional expense of these protections? Or maybe more to the point; can you afford NOT to have these additional protections? At CarInsurance.com it's easy to get multiple quotes all with a click of your mouse. And during the quoting process, it's simple to add or remove coverage to see how additional coverage will affect your budget.

You can learn more about Insurance Coverages by following this link.

What are you protecting?

What assets need to be protected from being plucked away if you cause injury or damage? A) Your car itself. If this is a significant asset, or at least the bank you owe money to thinks so, then you will need comprehensive and collision. B) Your net worth. Do you have an enormous net worth to protect. If so, either get it out of your name and into a trust or buy all the insurance you can. If you have little or nothing to protect, then you can get by with less and still be financially responsible.

However, after you determine how much protection to get, always ask how much more it is for the next level higher. Very often, you can get significantly more coverage for very little cost.

Car insurance isn't flashy. There is no "wow" factor and the opposite gender isn't going to be impressed by the size of your policy. But not having enough can be the difference between financial stability and financial ruin. For what its worth, CarInsurance.com finds financial stability incredibly appealing.

Life Insurance Need Calculator

2007-09-22T07:02:00.000-07:00

If you want to get some insurance, please stop for a while. There is an insurance calculator who will help us to how much insurance that we need.

This calculator will help you to decide how much life insurance you need if your survivors invest the life insurance benefits they receive. Please note that this Life Insurance Calculator is for example purposes only and should not be considered professional advice. Consult with your Life Insurance Agent regarding the amount coverage our Life Insurance Calculator quoted

You can get it at www.compuquotes.com

HOT Issues of Health Insurance

2007-09-20T02:23:00.000-07:00

Well, i've a new information on Health Insurance. I think you should read it.

NOV 2006 - What Do They Mean? -

By way of our numerous media outlets, including the Voice, 24-hour hotline and website, we strive to keep you updated on the latest developments involving your health insurance. From reading and listening to these sources, you know that there are several insurance issues which will remain front and center – put simply, “hot” – over the ensuing months and years. In this primer, we included a brief explanation on what some of these issues mean. It’s hoped that you find it informative and helpful. Mandatory Medicare

The term “Mandatory Medicare” refers to retirees and their spouses being forced to transfer out of their existing health insurance plan when they become eligible for Medicare (”Medicare-eligible”). In place of their existing insurance coverage, they are required to enroll in Medicare Parts A and B, as well as a Medicare supplemental plan.

Under the state’s group insurance program, which is administered by the GIC (Group Insurance Commission), Mandatory Medicare is imposed upon all Medicare-eligible retirees and their spouses. The mandate is contained within Section 18 of Chapter 32A of the General Laws, which took effect on July 1, 1991. As part of its group insurance program, a municipality may elect to implement Mandatory Medicare. In order to do so, it must adopt the local option provision, that is contained within the municipal group insurance law, Section 18 of Chapter 32B which also took effect in 1991.

It’s important to remember that if you’re not Medicare-eligible, you cannot be forced to transfer out of your existing insurance plan and can remain with it. If you have any questions about your Medicare eligibility, you should check with your local Social Security office.

GASB & Statement 45

The term “GASB” (pronounced “GAZBEE”) refers to the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, a private-sector board, financed by Wall Street, that establishes accounting standards for some 80,000 state and local governments, including what information should be contained in their financial reports. While they are not law, officials adhere to GASB standards.

Back in 2004, GASB issued accounting standards, known as Statement 45, that requires state and local governments to disclose their liability for future retiree healthcare costs in their financial reports. Statement 45 not only requires that healthcare liabilities be disclosed, but also encourages that liabilities be funded in much the same manner as pensions. While pre-funding of retiree healthcare is not required, doing so could be necessary in order to maintain a strong bond rating for the state and municipalities.

The state government and municipalities with revenues of $100 million or over must comply with GASB’s Statement 45 on July 1, 2007; municipalities, whose revenues are between $10 and $100 million, must report on July 1, 2008, and those with less than $10 million in revenues must do so on July 1, 2009.

Coalition Bargaining

The term “Coalition Bargaining” refers to the local option provision which became part of the municipal group insurance law (Section 19 of Chapter 32B) in 1993. It should be noted that the Association was a principal sponsor of this law.

If Section 19 is adopted by local officials and union/retiree representatives, then a public employee committee (PEC) is created, which includes a retiree representative appointed by our Association. The PEC negotiates with municipal officials over the insurance plans for local retirees, employees and survivors. An agreement on the plans must be approved by at least a 70% weighted vote of the PEC.

With coalition bargaining, retirees, survivors and employees all pay the same premium contribution percentage toward their health insurance plan. It also requires that out-of-area retirees must receive the same benefits as in-area retirees.

Retiree Drug Subsidy

The term “Retiree Drug Subsidy” or RDS refers to the federal subsidy program that the Congress created when it established the Medicare prescription drug program, known as Part D. The subsidy program began January 1, 2006.

Employers, including the state and municipalities, are eligible for RDS if they provide drug coverage, comparable to or better than Part D, to their retirees. Under RDS, the federal government, specifically the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), is essentially reimbursing the state and eligible municipalities for 28% of their total drug costs for Medicare retirees. According to CMS estimates, the average RDS payment will be approximately $668 per enrollee.

Insurance Advisory Committee

The term “Insurance Advisory Committee” or IAC refers to the eight member body which a municipality is required to establish under the municipal group insurance law (Section 3 of Chapter 32B). It should be noted that in 1993, the Association successfully enacted legislation, expanding the then seven member IAC, comprised of union representatives, to include a retiree representative appointed by the mayor, selectmen or county commissioners.

According to the IAC law, municipal officials must submit the health insurance plans, that they intend to offer to retirees and employees, to the IAC before they do so. If the IAC recommends changes, then officials must respond to them, explaining why they did not include particular suggestions in the final insurance plans.

Well...how do you think ??

Type#8:Workers' Compensation

2007-09-19T00:43:00.001-07:00

Workers' Compensation (colloquially known as workers' comp in North American English or compo in Australian English) provides insurance to cover medical care and compensation for employees who are injured in the course of employment, in exchange for mandatory relinquishment of the employee's right to sue their employer for the tort of negligence. The tradeoff between assured, limited coverage and lack of recourse outside the worker compensation system is known as "the compensation bargain".

While schemes differ between jurisdictions, provision can be made for weekly payments in place of wages (functioning in this case as a form of disability insurance), compensation for economic loss (past and future), reimbursement or payment of medical and like expenses (functioning in this case as a form of health insurance), and benefits payable to the dependents of workers killed during employment (functioning in this case as a form of life insurance). General damages for pain and suffering, and punitive damages for employer negligence, are generally not available in worker compensation plans. Cash benefits are established by state formulas with maximum benefit level. The benefits are administered on a state level, primarily by the state department of labor.

These laws are usually a feature of highly developed industrial societies, implemented after long and hard fought struggles by trade unions. Supporters of such schemes believe they improve working conditions and provide an economic safety net for employees. Conversely, these schemes are often criticised for removing or restricting workers' common law rights (such as suit in tort for negligence) in order to reduce governments' or insurance companies' financial liability.

Employees' compensation laws were first enacted in Europe and Oceania, with the United States Soviet Union and similar societies. following shortly thereafter. Workers' compensation programs were a key component of the labor structure of the former

Please reminding your boss to take you to the workers compensation on your company.

Type#7:Pet Insurance

2007-09-19T00:40:00.000-07:00

It pays the veterinary costs if our pet is ill or is injured in an accident. Some policies also pay out if the pet dies, or is lost or stolen.

The purpose of pet insurance is to mitigate the risk of incurring significant expense to treat ill or injured pets. As veterinary medicine is increasingly employing expensive medical techniques and drugs, and owners have higher expectations for their pets' health care and standard of living than previously, the market for pet insurance has increased.

United Kingdom Policies usually pay 100% of pets fees. Policies in the USA usually offer to pay 80-90% of the costs minus a deductible depending on the company and the specific policy. The owner will usually pay the amount due to the Vet, and then send in the claim form and receive reimbursement, which some companies and policies limit according to their own schedule of necessary and usual charges. In the event of a very high bill, some veterinarians will allow the owner to put off payment until the insurance claim is processed. Some insurers pay veterinarians directly on behalf of customers.

Traditionally, most pet insurance plans did not pay for preventative care (such as vaccinations) or elective procedures (such as neutering), or such coverage for such coverage. Recently however, some companies in the UK and US are offering routine care coverage.

In addition, companies often limit coverage for pre-existing medical conditions, thus giving owners an incentive to insure even very young animals who are not expected to incur high veterinary costs while they are still healthy.

Some insurers offer options not directly related to pet health, including covering boarding costs for animals whose owners are hospitalized, or costs (such as rewards or posters) associated with retrieving lost animals. Some policies also include travel cancellation coverage if owners must remain with pets who need urgent treatment or are dying.

Some UK policies for dogs also include third party liability insurance. Thus, for example, if a dog causes a car accident that damages a vehicle, the insurer will pay to rectify the damage for which the owner is responsible under the Animals Act 1971.

So, is anybody have this type of insurance for your pet? If you love your pet, you should have on it.

Type#6:Life insurance

2007-09-19T00:34:00.000-07:00

Life insurance or we can say life assurance is a contract between the policy owner and the insurer, where the insurer agrees to pay a sum of money upon the occurrence of the policy owner's death. In return, the policy owner (or policy payer) agrees to pay a stipulated amount called a premium at regular intervals.

As with most insurance polices, life assurance is a contract between the insurer and the policy owner (policyholder) whereby a benefit is paid to the designated Beneficiary (or Beneficiaries) if an insured event occurs which is covered by the policy. To be a life policy the insured event must be based upon life (or lives) of the people named in the policy.

Insured events that may be covered include:

death,
accidental death

Life policies are legal contracts and the terms of the contract describe the limitations of the insured events. Specific exclusions are often written into the contract to limit the liability of the insurer; for example claims relating to suicide, fraud, war, riot and civil commotion.

Life based contracts tend to fall into two major categories:

Protection policies - designed to provide a benefit in the event of specified event, typically a lump sum payment.
Investment policies - where the main objective is to facilitate the growth of capital by regular or single premiums.

Hmm...i don't like this type of insurance. Because it is so horrible. But, it has the advantage too. Specially for people we love it.

Type#5:Health insurance

2007-09-19T00:31:00.000-07:00

It is a type of insurance whereby the insurer pays the medical costs of the insured if the insured becomes sick due to covered causes, or due to accidents. The insurer may be a private organization or non-for-profit organization (Blue Cross, et. al.). Govenrmental agencies may offer health plans, but generally are not insuring anything and are self/publicly funded. Market-based health care systems such as that in the United States rely heavily on private and not for profit health insurance.

And i think this is the most important type of insurance for us. Why? Because healthy is everything for us. If we health, there are so many thing that we can do. Working, traveling, etc.

Type#4:Credit Insurance

2007-09-19T00:29:00.000-07:00

It is an insurance policy associated with a specific loan or line of credit which pays back some or all of any money owed should certain things happen to the borrower, such as death, disability, or unemployment.

The costs (called a "premium") for this are usually charged monthly, depending on the balance owed, and depending on the usage of the loan or line, could almost double the cost of it (on the opposite end of the spectrum, clever usage could avoid having to pay almost any premium at all).

The sale of credit insurance is controversial because it is almost always cheaper for an individual to forgo credit insurance, and instead have a term life insurance or disability insurance policy to cover the credit balance. The reason is that credit insurance is guaranteed issue, no matter if a person would otherwise be insurable or not. So the rates offered must reflect this, and be worse than if a healthy or otherwise insurable person were to purchase coverage on their own.

In addition, there is an even more controversial practice (called single premium credit insurance), usually associated with the sub prime lending industry, of charging the premium only one time at the beginning of the loan. For example, charging 5,000 dollars at the time of a mortgage refinance, which is usually financed (added to the total loan amount) as part of the loan. This is considered very bad by critics, since doing this is only cheaper if one is sure that one is going to stay with the loan forever and not refinance. Critics contend most people do not realize this and lose money by refinancing once again, thereby losing the benefits of the credit insurance

Type#3 : Boiler Insurance

2007-09-19T00:23:00.000-07:00

It is a type of property insurance that will pays accidental losses to machinery and equipment. Although it is called boiler insurance it is can actually cover us just about any device that uses, transmits or generate mechanical power, of course certain exclusions apply.

Standard property insurance policies normally exclude coverage for losses caused by mechanical breakdown, artificially generated electrical current, and explosions of high pressure steam boilers. Boiler insurance provides a way to buy coverage for those types of losses.

Boiler insurance can cover:

specific objects - "A specific boiler identified by year and/or serial number"
blanket objects - "blanket all electric motors"
comprehensive - "all objects unless specifically excluded"

In the United States, companies providing boiler insurance will generally perform jurisdictionally required boiler inspections as a "free service" and require a passing inspection as a condition of coverage. Twenty percent of a Boiler and Machinery policy is dedicated to boiler inspection.

Boiler insurance may alternatively be referred to as "equipment breakdown insurance", "machinery and equipment insurance" or any other such name.

Type#2 : Aviation insurance

2007-09-19T00:20:00.000-07:00

It insures against hull, spares, deductible, hull war and liability risks. When spares, or hull or anything else bad happens, they'll protect us.

Well, it's so dramatic. But this is what we will get. A full protected about something bad to us.

Type#1: Automobile Insurance

2007-09-19T00:13:00.000-07:00

Known in the English as motor insurance, is probably the most common form of insurance and may cover both legal liability claims against the driver and loss of or damage to the insured's vehicle itself. Throughout most of the United States an auto insurance policy is required to legally operate a motor vehicle on public roads. In some jurisdictions, bodily injury compensation for automobile accident victims has been changed to a no-fault system, which reduces or eliminates the ability to sue for compensation but provides automatic eligibility for benefits.Credit card companies insure against damage on rented cars.

Benefit Of Insurance

2007-09-19T00:06:00.000-07:00

Sometimes we don't know about what will going happen with us, with our children, or even with our car. We need something who can give us guaranteed about tragic occurence which befall us. For the example, once upon in time when we go the office and we get an accident, some people will bring us to the hospital and the other will bring our car to the workshop. Let's think for a moment. What should we do next?

That's correct. We should pay out our expense of hospital and our expense of workshop. Wow, that's a big money for us to spend. And now, let's compare if we take some insurance companya. Just call them, they'll manage all of it.

About Insurance

2007-09-18T23:44:00.000-07:00

There are some definition about insurance. Some people says insurance means promise of reimbursement in the case of loss, another says paid to people or companies so concerned about hazards that they have made prepayments to an insurance company. Another says that insurance is indemnity,protection against future loss.

But my definition about insurance for me is something to protect ours from something bad. So that we have a guaranted to get them back, such as our healthy, our car, our home (except our live;p). Now, what is your definition about insurance?