Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[powderjunkie]

Finally some good news for anyone who wants to see their insurance premiums to suck even more:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...intz-1.7357230

It seems very similar to banking and telecomm where there are just a few big companies behind the curtain which really limits how competitive the market actually is, despite a plethora of consumer facing brands that are essentially intermediaries

[Fuzz]

I trust that Jack Mintz has our best interests at heart.

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Finally some good news for anyone who wants to see their insurance premiums to suck even more:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...intz-1.7357230

It seems very similar to banking and telecomm where there are just a few big companies behind the curtain which really limits how competitive the market actually is, despite a plethora of consumer facing brands that are essentially intermediaries

Basically right now if you are a "good" driver you are being punished by the inability to raise rates on the "bad" drivers. With the rate cap removed the rates can be adjusted properly and you should see rates stabilize.

The second thing that needs to happen is No Fault injury coverage, with that system (Ontario uses it) there is no cap on treatments for your injuries the goal is to get you back to a pre accident condition the caveat is you can no longer sue for minor injury accidents. Its hard to imagine that a system that has no limit to treatment can be so much more cost effective than the current system but injury lawyers love that money and the cost per claim is so high that its not even close. Also to point out the ability to sue for "catastrophic" claims is not affected so if you suffer an injury not considered minor like broken bones for example nothing changes.

At the current rates insurance companies are actually running at a deficit for auto causing companies to consider dropping auto as a line of business in Alberta. Of course the other option is government insurance but i'm not sure what people are expecting from this option, its not going to be some insane drop in premiums as they still can't run at a deficit either. The insurance industry is highly regulated its not some unregulated cash grab.

Just some thoughts.

[Fuzz]

We could probably save a lot of insurance costs by raising the standard of drivers. The people on the roads that have their licenses really make me question how they got them in the first place.


And put your ####ing phone down, you godamn #######.

[Torture]

Wow, Jack Mintz' report came back saying exactly what Smith wanted it to recommend? This is shocking.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

The second thing that needs to happen is No Fault injury coverage, with that system (Ontario uses it) there is no cap on treatments for your injuries the goal is to get you back to a pre accident condition the caveat is you can no longer sue for minor injury accidents. Its hard to imagine that a system that has no limit to treatment can be so much more cost effective than the current system but injury lawyers love that money and the cost per claim is so high that its not even close. Also to point out the ability to sue for "catastrophic" claims is not affected so if you suffer an injury not considered minor like broken bones for example nothing changes.

.

I am torn, I don't like that the mechanism of injury defines how much is compensable for the injury.

[Tacopuck]

Originally Posted by GGG

How much did your house go up to the average house?

There was also the shift from commercial to residential.

The only way to compare fairly is to look at city budget with inflation and pop growth removed.

Assessed value only went up 4% in that time

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Basically right now if you are a "good" driver you are being punished by the inability to raise rates on the "bad" drivers. With the rate cap removed the rates can be adjusted properly and you should see rates stabilize.

The second thing that needs to happen is No Fault injury coverage, with that system (Ontario uses it) there is no cap on treatments for your injuries the goal is to get you back to a pre accident condition the caveat is you can no longer sue for minor injury accidents. Its hard to imagine that a system that has no limit to treatment can be so much more cost effective than the current system but injury lawyers love that money and the cost per claim is so high that its not even close. Also to point out the ability to sue for "catastrophic" claims is not affected so if you suffer an injury not considered minor like broken bones for example nothing changes.

At the current rates insurance companies are actually running at a deficit for auto causing companies to consider dropping auto as a line of business in Alberta. Of course the other option is government insurance but i'm not sure what people are expecting from this option, its not going to be some insane drop in premiums as they still can't run at a deficit either. The insurance industry is highly regulated its not some unregulated cash grab.

Just some thoughts.

I'd be curious to see the claims payouts for property damages as compared to the legal claims. I feel like events like hail storms and wildfires are enormous and have a signficant impact on the claims paid.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

We could probably save a lot of insurance costs by raising the standard of drivers. The people on the roads that have their licenses really make me question how they got them in the first place.


And put your ####ing phone down, you godamn #######.

Places like Germany have much more stringent requirements to obtain licenses, and they are a lot more expensive adding to the privilege.

The issue here is that we, as a society, treating driving as the only real option for transportation. For the vast majority of people, driving is required.

If there were better transport options, then driving could be more stringent

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Places like Germany have much more stringent requirements to obtain licenses, and they are a lot more expensive adding to the privilege.

The issue here is that we, as a society, treating driving as the only real option for transportation. For the vast majority of people, driving is required.

If there were better transport options, then driving could be more stringent

You had me at the first part. You lost me in the end. I don't think "you need a car to live comfortably here" is a reason to have my life far more at risk on our roads than Germany's. Their motor vehicle death and accident rates say they are doing something very right. If we have to subsidize proper driver education and testing for some segments of society, fine. That seems better than throwing our hands up in the air and letting people put the general public at undue risk.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

You had me at the first part. You lost me in the end. I don't think "you need a car to live comfortably here" is a reason to have my life far more at risk on our roads than Germany's. Their motor vehicle death and accident rates say they are doing something very right. If we have to subsidize proper driver education and testing for some segments of society, fine. That seems better than throwing our hands up in the air and letting people put the general public at undue risk.

agreed. Driving should be a privilege.

good luck convincing people to look at it that way.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Torture

Wow, Jack Mintz' report came back saying exactly what Smith wanted it to recommend? This is shocking.

A rational person might ask "Why bother writing a report if the conclusions are not in doubt?".

To line the pockets of their supporters, of course.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Cappy

agreed. Driving should be a privilege.

good luck convincing people to look at it that way.

Fair point, it would be suicide for anyone to try and implement anything that made it harder to get their hands on a steering wheel.

[Harry Lime]

The part where they insisted that a public option for insurance would actually raise rates, lost me. That has never happened. They seem to think that in a few hundred years, it could end up costing the payer more, but that just made me excited for my new robot body that would allow me to live that long.

[Fuzz]

Government announces made in Alberta crypto scam led to billions in losses in 2028.


https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...565969D50B9A8B

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Government announces made in Alberta crypto scam led to billions in losses in 2028.


https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...565969D50B9A8B

I love how all the news pieces about this say they are 'Canada's oldest and largest digital asset custodian'. So old and trustworthy, they were founded in...2017. With a whole "five years serving clients" they are "veterans"! Ah, the internet, where you can say whatever you want.

[Cappy]

First chilly day of the winter/fall... grid alert

https://globalnews.ca/news/10824235/...ectricity-use/

[troutman]

I’m stuck in the middle of this:

How a proposed mine is drilling a deep divide in a historic Alberta coal town

https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/...ack-plebiscite

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Government announces made in Alberta crypto scam led to billions in losses in 2028.


https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...565969D50B9A8B

Wow. 2028 Sounds like it was a wild ride. Thankfully we still have time!

Do we need to find John Connor?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Locke

Wow. 2028 Sounds like it was a wild ride. Thankfully we still have time!

Do we need to find John Connor?

I'm more of a Nostradamus than liquid metal.