I invite all readers to respond not only to any items I post, but to one another, thus creating a dialogue with our editors and fellow readers. The following are some instructions and ground rules.
To participate, all you need to do is go to the bottom of any entry, put down your name, e-mail address and comment, hit "Preview" to look over what you wrote, and then "Post" to have it added to the thread of the discussion.
As for the ground rules:
--Please be aware that your post might not go "live" immediately, as this is a moderated blog. Sam Friedman or an associate must review all potential posts before being "published" online.
--The reason we review posts is to make sure they do not contain any inappropriate or libelous language. We encourage controversial remarks, but want to make sure the blog remains within the realm of good taste and fair play.
--You are also free to comment on the remarks posted by fellow readers. The more the merrier as we debate the most pressing issues facing the industry.
--You are also invited to comment on any stories that run in our weekly newsmagazine, or posted on our Web site, which you can access by clicking onto www.propertyandcasualtyinsurancenews.com.
--I also urge you to suggest potential subjects to explore in our "Story Leads" category. We are eager to get your feedback on the work we do and could be doing at NU!
Thanks so much for logging on and making this blog a true insurance community dialogue. I think of this blog as more of an electronic town hall meeting than a soapbox lecture, so please post as often as you'd like.
Comments (2)
Sam, this will be good for some of us who are not "bloggers" and who think we know something about insurance. Time will tell.
Posted by Doug Thompson | September 8, 2006 6:11 PM
Posted on September 8, 2006 18:11
All of the discussion surrounding the issue of commission/fee disclosure is rather ridiculous--maybe, more accurately, disingenuous.
Mr. Lieberman directly addresses the most salient point--consumers are free to shop. In the capitalist economy, the consumer rewards and punishes by their purchasing choices.
Likewise, the consumer is punished or rewarded for their lack of SELF-education as they make such purchasing choices.
The fiction that insurance agents are in the business to "help" the consumer needs to be formally done away with. The fact is we are all in the insurance business to make money, just like the guys who make and sell washers and dryers or any other widget. Greed drives the capitalist economy.
Years ago I spent two years selling appliances. The objective was to generate a profit for the company, and secondarily to help the consumer. There were back-end rebates, volume rebates, push pieces, etc.--all based on profitability. Profit was first.
Are we in the insurance industry really afraid to admit that is why we are in business? Our secondary objective is to help the consumer.
If we can pretend that we serve the consumer first, and thereby increase profits, then we can maintain the fiction.
But we all know that profits and revenues to the company are number one. If not, we all lose our jobs to someone that will make it so!
Should the rules change for insurance fee and commission disclosure just because the dollars are bigger? No, if there are back-end fees, that's the business of the broker and the carrier.
Our meddling state governments have no business interfering. If the consuming corporation who bought through the broker thought they got ripped off, then change brokers!
Those crying foul over fees should go back to their own businesses and be forced to disclose all of their margins and profit sources as well.
If we continue to over-protect the consumer and businesses, insurance companies as well, then no one will accept responsibility for their personal behavior and choices. We end up with a big blame game and government meddlers where they don't belong. My, doesn't that sound familiar?
My personal opinion is that our capitalist economy is conflicted as to where insurance should stand and how it should be treated.
Should it be allowed to swing with the whims of consumer and corporate choices--the market forces?
Or, since it has the potential to save personal or business lives financially, or destroy them if not placed or structured properly, should it be in a different category--one that is altruistic, without the elements that create distractions of greed, dishonesty and abuse?
The fact that the insurance industry would most likely die in such an altruistic environment is proof of the real purpose of our industry--to make money, and then to help the consumer.
If the consumer doesn't like it, go to another broker or agent or insurance carrier. Over-regulation only leads to further problems on all sides.
Posted by Eric Byers | August 12, 2008 5:59 PM
Posted on August 12, 2008 17:59