The president doesn’t understand how insurance works. It seems he’s just as ignorant about it now as he was when he was a kid. I’d have laughed at him, too. I still do. Or would, if he weren’t running the country.
[Update monday morning]
More (amusing) thoughts from Tom Maguire:
Obama apparently blundered to the common (and thriftier) conclusion, since no one buys collision on a junker.
However, months later he realized that paying more for collision would have been a great idea, so history is re-written. It is now due to ACME’s rapaciousness that they are unwilling to right this wrong and write him a check. And they laughed! Surely Chait can hear the racial overtones there! After the laughter died they should have explained to the college grad that he could file a third-party claim against the other driver, assuming Obama was not at fault, but that also may have been too confusing.
Well. If even Obama can be duped by greedy insurers into saving his money and taking a sensible risk, what hope do the rest of us have? Surely we need these new health insurance mandates to make sure both that we buy policies and that the policies we buy have everything we need, not just everything we (stupidly think we) want.
I find the condescension and arrogance of these “brilliant” “liberals” insufferable.
Isn’t it great that we now have a smart, intelligent, did I say smart and intelligent president instead of that dummy who did all the bad stuff, whatsisname…
So the insurance company was bad for not giving him retroactive collision coverage? Did this guy actually read his policy? If he didn’t, how sure can we be that he has read anything else (like the current bill, or even that pesky thing called the Constitution)?
I worked property insurance for 2 yeard (10 in MI, 2 in FL) and I talk to at least 6 people a day just as clueless about how insurance works, they buy the minimum early on, refuse to read the policy or listen to the agent, then when the claims adjuster explains it’s not covered, it’s a tirade of some combination of “My agent never told me that” “What do I have insurance for” “I’m going to call a lawyer” “I pay all my premiums and now you won’t pay when I have a claim?” The difference. Obama’s ignorance on insurance issues is not uncommon, it’s just distressing coming from The President.
In all the time I was an adjuster, I was never told by a supervisor to pay an insured less than they were entitled to under the policy, but I saw several instances of claim stories being twisted and distorted by the media such that they did not resemble the truth at all, so every time I see a story of how some unfair health insurance company cheated some poor helpless insured, I wonder if it’s one of those situations, and that was before Obama and hissocialist cronies decided to demonize the insurance companies and use that as an excuse to seize a sixth of the US economy in the name of “health care reform”
I’d be willing to bet a lot of money that he hasn’t read the current bill. Of course, there is no current bill…
I get mad every time I hear them demonize insurance companies. Insurance companies are a business. They don’t cover preexisting conditions because that’s the whole bet that insurance is. Buyers are betting they will need the insurance and the insurance company is betting that enough won’t that they can stay in business.
Insurance is a transfer of risk to an underwriter who is doing it for the potential of profit. This is a good thing for all involved (unless the govt. sticks it’s nose into it.)
Obama is not the only boob in DC that doesn’t seem to understand this (just one of the most obvious.)
Which does not matter a lot. If only “accidents” are insured, then most diabetes patients are not insured, nor are a lot of other inheritable diseases including cancer. We already have disability and accident insurance for these “accidents”. People need health insurance for a reason.
Which is kind of my point why private insurance for health purposes is pointless and inane. You will want a system which covers everyone from birth. However people should be able to select the practitioner they want, when they want, even if they have to pay out of pocket to do it.
“how sure can we be that he has read anything else (like the current bill, or even that pesky thing called the Constitution)?”
Given his behaviour, Chris, it’s highly likely we can be sure he hasn’t read the Constitution. I”m wondering if any of the Dems have. š
If only āaccidentsā are insured
Insurance is a specific type of business. If it’s a different kind of ‘business’ it shouldn’t be called insurance.
Insurance is based on populations. If you have a population for example where everyone was a diabetic then no insurance is possible against diabetes for this population. You could say, pay so much and we’ll give you these services. This is neither insurance nor much of a business.
Now we could say, a certain percentage of people born will eventually develop diabetes and come up with an insurance plan for that. However, if we did some kind of genetic test that removed the ‘accident’ potential we are again back to a position where insurance is no longer a possibility. We could do something, but calling it insurance is wrong. Only someone intentionally trying to fool people would call that insurance.
Oh, they’ve read it, Barbara. But steam comes out of their ears when they do. Obama himself was whining about it a few years back because it didn’t guarantee people a right to a job and health care.
Rand,
I remember that. He is a big believer in “positive” rights. He thinks that the Constitution should say what government can do, not what it can’t. He is missing the point of the whole thing.
The Founders knew that they were not perfect and they didn’t think anyone coming after them would be either. So they put together a document that would limit the damage that less than perfect people with power could do. It seems to have worked so far.
Chris, the Constitution does say what the Federal government can do: Article I, Section 8.
This was a major point of debate between those who supported ratification (later “Federalists”) and those who opposed it (later “Democratic-Republicans”, even later “Democrats”). The Federalists took the attitude (for public consumption, anyway) that if it wasn’t an explicitly enumerated power, the Federal government didn’t have it. The D-Rs insisted that the government would expand to exercise all powers not explicitly denied it.
The latter position has proved correct, unfortunately.
Having been rear-ended (in Chicago, no less) by a guy with no insurance, no license and no English-speaking, I understand Obama’s problem. BTW, in the city of Chicago, unlike the suburbs, the police do not come to the scene of an accident unless the vehicles are not drivable.
I also understand the point he was trying to make – insurance companies need to provide a clear list of what’s covered. I do recall discussed on this blog the case of a “maternity insurance” policy that only covered $2,000.
Rand – I’ll take that bet on Obama not having read the bill. He read both bills, and came to the meeting with an 11 page summary of how to reconcile them.
I didn’t think that even Chris Gerrib could defend Obama’s completely gormless ignorance of a simple fact about car insurance. I was wrong. Mr. Gerrib, is there nothing that King Unicorn can do wrong in your eyes?
By the way, just to clarify — I can understand Obama being ignorant of insurance details (like, what’s he paying for beyond being allowed to take his beater out on the road) when he was young, and a first-time driver. What I can’t excuse is the fact that he didn’t seem to learn from his initial mistake — “Oops, I shoulda bought comp and collision.” Instead, he seems to have totally denied the fact that there is a difference between mere liability, and coverage that extends to one’s own car, but seems to have simply reverted to his previous ignorance, dismissing the insurance rules as some sort of conspiracy to confuse people. I’ll bet you like a lot of husbands he just lets Michelle handle all those pesky money things. I’ll bet you she facepalmed through that whole speech, and gave him an earful later — which he probably “yes, deared” his way through. The sitcom just writes itself…
Andrea – actually, there are a lot of things Obama could do to get me angry – not passing health care reform being one of them.
Somehow I suspect that Obama knows how insurance works now. His point was 1) a lot of Americans don’t and 2) medical coverage is a lot more complex than car insurance. Without some standardized definitions, competitive shopping becomes difficult if not impossible.
He read both bills,
Really?
And you know that, how?
“Andrea – actually, there are a lot of things Obama could do to get me angry – not passing health care reform being one of them. ”
If only Emperor Obama could dissolve the Senate and actually get stuff done!
And you know that, how? Because he’s spoken intelligently about them at length in various forums.
Even assuming that I agreed with your hilarious assessment of his “speaking intelligently” about them, that just means that he’s been well briefed, not that he’s read the monstrosities.
I don’t think Obama put much thought into telling that story other than the fact that he’d get to be cute for 5 seconds and say “Acme Insurance”. When Obama enters comedian mode you can always tell because he does the obligatory 5 second pause as he stares of into the far corner of the room, chin held high, waiting for everyone to chuckle and/or clap. The only part I find funny to anything he says is when you look at a transcript of what he said. The transcript always reads cleanly and the sentences appear proper and flow from one thought to the next. However, when you actually listen to him you have to get past the 20 something “Uhhh’s” and “Ummm’s” after every other word. I’m certain that if they were to put all his little verbal ticks in the transcript that most anyone would read it and think, in the words of Rahm Emanuel, that the man is a F’ing Retard.
To me though, I just can’t help but see the glaring irony of how he recites an anecdote of the failures of mandated insurance. Yea, that’s a glowing example of what’s to be expected from mandated health insurance right there Mr. President — good job. I’ll file that one away into the, “Look how bad the Post office does….” folder.
Hence the problem. Fed says to insurance company you must include aroma therapy in your policy. I don’t want that but it’s shoved down my throat anyway. And I have to pay for it. And then everyone wonders why premiums are still going up. It’s because competitive shopping is no longer possible.
Curt Thomson – why are we stuck on stupid with “aroma therapy” or similar BS? How about more important things like mandating you can’t call something “maternity coverage” and only cover $2,000?
Rick C:
“If only Emperor Obama could dissolve the Senate and actually get stuff done!”
But that’s impossible. How will Obama maintain control without the bureaucracy?
OK I’ll bite. “The Regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station.”
The regional community organizations will have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the locals in line…
Titus,
Does that mean that the Tea Party is the Rebel Alliance?
Yes, and they’re smuggling plans, plans for the Death Panel.
āDonāt be too proud of this medical-bureaucratic terror youāve constructedā¦the ability to destroy the elderly is insignificant next to the power of Community Organizingā¦ā
āDonāt try to frighten us with your rabble-rousing ways, Obama, your sad devotion to that Marxist religion has not allowed you to conjure-up the necessary Congressional votes, nor given you the clairvoyance to predict the will of the peopleāhurk!ā
āI find your lack of faithā¦disturbing.ā
Somehow I suspect that Obama knows how insurance works now. His point was 1) a lot of Americans donāt and 2) medical coverage is a lot more complex than car insurance.
Once again, the American people are not as stupid as Obama or Gerrib thinks they are. Moreover, most Americans were never as stupid as Obama or Gerrib.
What’s really interesting to me is that Obama had basic insurance because it was mandated by the state. In other words, he did what the state told him to do, and didn’t actually consider what it was he was doing. Had the state not mandated insurance, he would have seeked the recourse available to him; he would have sued the guy that hit him. Failing that, he would at least known that fixing his car was his problem. There is even a chance he may have purchased the right insurance he wanted, had he called up the insurance company and asked about the services rather than saying, “I just want the state required minimum”.
How about more important things like mandating you canāt call something āmaternity coverageā and only cover $2,000?
That’s it Chris, let’s mandate away any responsibility the consumer has in knowing what they are paying for. Now that will control costs. We should go even further. Don’t you think car insurance should pay for preexisting conditions. If I wreck my car with someone else last week I should be able to buy insurance this week to pay for it, right?
Yes, let’s put politicians in charge so those evil insurance companies will use mandated terminology that insures everyone knows what there talking about. Politicians have set the example of speaking plainly and never attempting to confuse the people that vote for them.
Let me add… any one businessman will tend to do things that are evil for the consumer. Have two or more of them compete and the consumer will effectively regulate them with no need for government interference. Have the government force the consumer to pay and you’ve just removed that important regulatory power, which the government then wants to do and can’t.
This is so fundamental that anyone arguing against it either has no ability to reason or benefits from a corrupt system as a part of it.
“How about more important things like mandating you canāt call something āmaternity coverageā and only cover $2,000?”
If it only covers maternity expenses up to $2,000 dollars, then it is labeled correctly. That word “mandate” again. As in the government tells business how to run their business to the point the line blurs. How you can deny you’re a Socialist at heart is beyond me.
Iāll take that bet on Obama not having read the bill. He read both bills, and came to the meeting with an 11 page summary of how to reconcile them.
11 page summary prepared by staffers.
Because heās spoken intelligently about them at length in various forums.
In many cases, read from teleprompters and failing that, prepped by staffers.
“Acme Insurance” (and I would lay a sizable wager that “Acme” not only insures my house and car, but is my employer) does provide a clear list of what’s covered — it’s called the “policy”.
Now, Dunham’s record — or rather, his handlers’ careful concealment of his record — suggests that he is a semi-literate affirmative action baby. He probably got his policy, struggled through it until he encountered a word of three syllables, and then gave up in frustration. As I wrote earlier, however, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the powers granted to the Federal government. Allowing the lazy and incompetent to slide through life is not one of them.