some kind of insurance policies. On the other hand trying registering a car or purchasing a home having a mortgage
without insurance, would not be permitted by law. I can't think of any other for profit industry that has the
power in getting our governments to make life changing legislature. Here is why I think they're able to accomplish
controlling many facets on what we can and cannot do?
It all begins with people they hire called actuaries, they assess risk factors in people's lives. Then those
statistics determine our insurance costs. As an example an eighteen year old male, living in a major city, driving
a Honda Civic will pay a small fortune with their car insurance. They have determined males of that age have more
accidents, the chances for theft is higher in a big city, and there are many Honda Civics out there meaning more
claims. Still using driving, I agree that wearing a seatbelt can save a person's life in an accident, but up until
the last few decades it wasn't a law, but an option. I presume back then the insurance companies figured-out that
if they go to the government showing statistics, they could get a law passed where everyone was required to wear a
seatbelt which they did.
As I mentioned above they are all about profit, not as much about our safety as they would like us to believe.
Just think by having had the government put in place a seatbelt law how much money did they save in claims. The
government is not innocent here either, again they pitched safety, but made some serious revenues from ticketing
those not wearing seatbelts. There were many stubborn people in those days who opposed the law and paid a hefty
price. The thing is when it comes to making a premium price they can do what they want, but when the risk factor
is high, out of their control, then enlisting the government to make laws for them are perfect. Let's face it the
easiest way to get people to buy into a trip is through fear!
I know this might be a taboo subject for most, but smoking is another avenue where the risk factor for insurance
companies paying-out was higher than those who didn't. However being a legal substance for those of the age of
majority, how would they reduce their risk factors in medical policies? Again recruit the governments, use the
medical communities, and scare the hell out of the general population that smoking will kill them. Obviously
smoking is terrible for one's health, but again I veer back to it being a legal product. However once the campaign
against smoking got steam where people bought-in, they made and enforced laws preventing smoking in certain areas,
eventually all public and work places. Remember this is all about our safety and health. With that said how much
money are insurance companies saving on claims from smokers? Let's not forget our government highly taxing
cigarettes to discourage us from using them. It great knowing that our government and insurance companies are
simply nice folks watching-out for our well-being! Right! No motive just kindness and consideration for all! What
a great world we live in!
I have no doubt the actuaries determined that work places weren't safe enough, so that made insurance companies
more vulnerable for payouts from workers and customers getting injured. How much more not sure, but they as usual
enlisted the government to change the work place safety laws, all under the owners expense. The truth is again
insurance companies are businesses, if someone makes a claim with all the laws in place, companies following
certain set procedures, they have a better chance of not paying-out. The government is also as usual gets a piece
of action too, if businesses don't comply they receive hefty fines. So again is it about our safety or their
money?
In conclusion I have not doubt that the insurance companies have a nice effect in regulating our country, and huge
influence in how we live our lives!
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/Arnold_Nadler/56474
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/9335988
