The capitalistic, child deceiving, heartburn giving holiday.(user submitted) Posted
Wednesday, December 18, 2002 by wlofie
I(wlofie)was once asked to do a Christmas essay for school.
I'm reusing it here, it was meant as a sarcastic ironic piece,
unfortunately it went a tad over the head of the teacher.
Understanding insurance companies:(Editorial) Posted
Wednesday, December 18, 2002 by wlofie
It's struck me that many people don't actually know what an insurance policy actually is. Sure, most people will give you the "it's in case I get sick" (health insurance) "it's in case I smash into someone" (car insurance). But what, as such is an insurance? Hear the silence, watch the dazed glazed over looks of confusion.
Ok, simply put, an insurance company is a privileged bookie, bookmaker, bet taker.
What you do when you go to an insurance company and get a health insurance is in effect.
You: "Hi, I'd like to place a running bet"
Insurance salesperson: "Sure, what stake and what area?"
You: "I'd like to bet, that I get sick during the period of the running bet"
Insurance salesperson: "okay, let me just go through you with a fine toothcomb, send you to a physical and so on so I can calculate your individual odds, then run those odds through our statistical database to diminish them further"
You: "okay" (you take the physical)
Insurance person: "yes, I'm willing to cover that bet, the cost will be this, the payment if you 'win' will be this"
You: "okay"
Insurance person: "sign here"
You: "okay" (signing)
Insurance person: "thank you and see you"
You: "thank you and see you"
Insurance person: (silently under his breath, "one born every minute")
You just made a bet with the insurance company, as long as you stay healthy, they make money (money that they can make a profit on by investing, or just getting interest on), but if you get sick, they have to pay you.
To calculate these odds, you allowed them to become more intimate with you than your wife, ask questions that would get most people a smack atop the head, then run those odds (your individual remember) through a "depreciating" algorithm against national statistics, and then you even allowed them to put in fine print about "unless in case of" "not in the case of" "except where otherwise specified" "void if company policy demands"(a policy that you btw are not allowed to view or read or even see).
Bookies never had it so good.
Let's look at it from the insurance company's side.
They make the rules, they make the exceptions, they decide if you won, and you pay them.
Even if they have to make a payment to you, their odds are good enough over all to cover it, despite that, they also get to deduct (in most countries) the payment from their taxes (after all they took a "capital loss").
They get to have your money, to draw interest or use it in a fund or in stock market dealings. That profit is thanks to you.
They get to set the odds (so do bookies), but they get to have more information than bookies.
They get to set the rules of the bet as well as the exceptions:
Them: "well yes you are sick, so we should pay, but that disease (plague) isn't actually covered, since you should have known that the area was plague ridden, what we will do is try to sue you for attempted insurance fraud."
You: "but but but, the area has never had plague in it before???"
Them: "ahh but any area not designated as clean is a high risk area diminishing your chances of collecting"
You: "what is the definition of clean?"
Them: "a sterile sealed environment with every precaution taken, and no import or export of anything into or out of it"
You: "sterile, no import or export? How about food?"
Them: "well that is not our concern"
You: "but without food I'd die just the same"
Them: "that is also not our concern, we also won't cover starvation or hunger strikes but I can sell you a life insurance, which also won't cover you if you die, unless you do so in one of the 2 proscribed ways, and if you do, we'll try to argue it and draw out the argumentation so long that you won't be able to collect anyway"
You: "why wasn't i informed of these rules and policies before signing?"
Them: "had you been informed, you would not have signed and even if you had signed you would not have paid, we are in this to make money you know! good DAY! *click*"
you: "umm right, make money"
Insurance companies have had it good, no big expenses lately (prior to 2001), they've gotten used to "money flows in" as opposed to "normal profits" so now that terror is again (it always was) a world wide issue, they go "ooh no we won't cover THAT"
They have even deified terrorists, by using the same language often used for "acts of god" towards terrorist attacks (NBC, nuclear biological chemical).
No wonder a few of the bookies I used to know wanted to start insurance companies, like they said, "the profit margin is larger and we can trick the bet placers a lot more."
wlofie
Comments (0)
The largest scandal in modern Swedish intelligence/political history? Posted
Wednesday, December 18, 2002 by wlofie
source: DN article
It has long been an "official secret" that SÄPO (säkerhets polisen (security police)) during the 1950'ies and 60'ies registered political opinion for "security reasons" (ie, registered people were considered "security risks", today (2002 17th of December) it became ( partly at least )known to what degree this has happened.
Prosecutors, courts, JO (Justitie Ombudsmannen(The swedish parlamentary commissioner for the judiciary and civil administration)) and JK (Justitie Kanslern (approx attorney general)) failed in their democratic control of this.
All this information came from Säkerhetstjänst kommissionen. (security service commission, a commission to examine how the security service has done their job). They (ST K) have gone over old archives with a fine tooth comb, interviewed keypersons and read secret papers for over three years. A total of 400 persons have been interviewed under oath, among them a large number of retired politicians, military personell and police chiefs.
It is a dark and in some parts unknown picture of sweden during the cold war that is given. Foremost the number of persons affected by the states suspicions.
A total of 130 000 or more swedes were secretly registered at the end of the 1960's. The only reason was often that they were thought to be communists. The information often came from socialdemocratic informers, who were recruited by the military and social democratic movements common spy organ, IB. Between IB, Säpo and the military security service, information was freely and plentifully shared according to the report.
The Security commission now state that some of these people never should have ended up in these registers. The Security service's threat scenarios were cliche, exaggerated and out of date, in the opinion of the commision.
-Almost no cases lead to criminal charges says Gunnar Brodin (Chairperson of the commission)
In the report it's stated that the 1960's and 1970's socialdemocratic governments carried a large part of the responsibility for the extent of the registration. The directives to the security service's were according to the commission dual. Olof Palme, Tage Erlander as well as the then defence minister Sven Andersson should have known about the registration. Neither Ingvar Carlsson or Sten Andersson who both belonged to the government office during the years in question has wanted to admitt any political responsibility to the commission DN is told.
The commission found that not only were far more people registered for their political opinions than were previously thought. The authorities who are charged with protecting the citizen's integrity was also affected by an overzealous "russia fear".
-Prosecutors and courts have contributed towards individuals integrity being violated.
The JO and JK can be said to have sanctioned this, Gunnar Brodin claims.
According to Brodin prosecutors have requested and courts approved phone taps on too loose foundations. In several cases the phone taps is supposed to have continued for over 10 years. Jo and JK are also supposed to have been given "signals" that violations against individuals without acting.
-A certain amount of solidarisation between the authorities charged with overseeing the security service, and the security service's can't be excluded says Gunnar Brodin.
The commissions mission was to audit all security activity from 1945 and forwards. The stress is on the time between the end of the 1950's and the middle of the 1970's, but quite a bit is said about Säpo's activities in modern times. The reports opinion here is that there is still a tangible risk that the prohibition against opinionregistration that was effected 1969, could be broken.
The report is now on the minister of justice's (Tomas Bodström) table. Bodström already on tuesday stated some actions that are connected to the critique.
-We plan a stronger police-data-law and a suggestion that the person who is wiretapped will be represented by legal council at the court (the one where the wiretap gets allowed or denied), says Bodström.
the whole documentation(swedish)
translation: wlofie
French 'at' baptized Posted
Thursday, December 12, 2002 by wlofie
France(TT-AFP):In france the wise have finished discussing what to call the @ character, the "at". The official french name will be "arobase, which has been generally used by french internet users even before this. Arobase comes from an old spanish measurement that was symbolized by an "a" in a circle.
wlofie
"Hell" Awaits Sydney's inhabitants Posted
Sunday, December 8, 2002 by wlofie
"Hell" Awaits Sydney's inhabitants
Sydney, Australia HD via TT-AFP
The Authorities in Sydney
Excerpt from article:
The authorities in Sydney encouraged the inhabitants to "prepare for hell", and said that people who are caught trying to set fires must be stopped harshly.
Thanks to temporarily lower temperatures, and weaker winds, the more than 4500 fire fighters got time to make "fire breaks" around the town.
---snip---
A clearly furious Bob Carr (The government chief of the state) said that people that discover that someone is trying to set a fire has to act. "if you see an arsonist, go for him, attack him, do what ever you want, we'll fix it retroactively with a new law"
-ed op, whilst I can see being pissed off, even raging furious, here is a clue, if you are in the government you don't get paid to be emotional, you get paid to be cool calm and collected in a crisis. As for his comment, what IS it nowadays with politicians and laws, "we'll fix it retroactively with a new law"??? what is that all about??? stop the person sure. Putting a free hunting licence is even cooler??? shoot anyone with matches or a lighter. "where my gun at, and while I'm at it, give me a box of matches (just in case I have to 'plant' a little evidence)."
wlofie