"To use the auto carrier analology Obama has used, it is like what the Geico's and Progressives of the world has done. Years ago everyone pretty much had Allstate, State Farm, Farmer's or Nationwide. Along came the gekko and those companies had to change their way of doing business to keep up with them"

For the win. This is numero uno why the analogy fails (aside that I think the story is complete BS, which I can explain if anyone cares, to me it doesn't matter).

If anything auto insurance is one of the most competitive markets. It isn't in the insurer's best interest to screw over its customers and develop a bad reputation (i.e. "laughing" at a potential claim). There are so many players in the game, and pricing and service is paramount. Anyone, whether he/she is a Harvard grad or a first time buyer, knows there are many options for car insurance, sweet jiminy how many Progressive Flo and GEICO gecko commercials are there? We use GEICO, if they did anything that we were unhappy about, we'd switch carriers in an instant, or at least when our coverage ends, which is every six months and not monthly but again that's beside the point. It was such a stupid comment I have trouble letting it go, although I should. I can't think of a politician, GOP or DEM, that gets by with this.

I was starting to wonder if he was making up that story as well . . .

Imagine not being able to buy oranges, or fruit in general, across state lines. How much would an orange cost in Minnesota? The health care industry is set up similarly, and for some reason opening markets across state lines is not a priority for the Dems.

Little Danny wrote: If you increase the market to new competition, the prices go down as each company competes with each other in a pricing war to attract new business. If there are only a limited number of companies who provide the service, they can keep the rate high as the consumer has no alternative.

My understanding (which is limited in this area) is that insurance is traditionally regulated at the state level, similar to public utilities. What are the grounds to eviscerate the "laboratories of democracy" and institute federal control over something that has been regulated by states for centuries? Lowering costs? Should that also be justification for shredding up any other state-regulated fields when it could potentially lower prices?

Manhattan Buckeye wrote: "To use the auto carrier analology Obama has used, it is like what the Geico's and Progressives of the world has done. Years ago everyone pretty much had Allstate, State Farm, Farmer's or Nationwide. Along came the gekko and those companies had to change their way of doing business to keep up with them"

For the win. This is numero uno why the analogy fails (aside that I think the story is complete BS, which I can explain if anyone cares, to me it doesn't matter).

If anything auto insurance is one of the most competitive markets. It isn't in the insurer's best interest to screw over its customers and develop a bad reputation (i.e. "laughing" at a potential claim). There are so many players in the game, and pricing and service is paramount. Anyone, whether he/she is a Harvard grad or a first time buyer, knows there are many options for car insurance, sweet jiminy how many Progressive Flo and GEICO gecko commercials are there? We use GEICO, if they did anything that we were unhappy about, we'd switch carriers in an instant, or at least when our coverage ends, which is every six months and not monthly but again that's beside the point. It was such a stupid comment I have trouble letting it go, although I should. I can't think of a politician, GOP or DEM, that gets by with this.

That's because no other politician CAN get away with this -- only one being aided and abetted by a media that is totally in the tank for him.

If a Republican had said something like this, you can be assured there would have been national stories making that politician look like a total fool. And deservedly so.

Let me guess....


His insurance didn't work cause he inherited it from Bush.???? No???

Shane Falco wrote: Let me guess....


His insurance didn't work cause he inherited it from Bush.???? No???

Nice, lol.

Bad, bad, bad example. There are so many other ways to argue against insurance agents. This failed explanation is pretty bad.

I can't believe SOME people actually buy what this idiots says. I really can't believe Obama is a Harvard educated man with some of the hairbrain schemes he has.