[Donny_Brasco]

I'm not sure about you, but I have insurance from our government "Saskatchewan Government Insurance" (SGI). Now, not that SGI is perfect, but my insurance rates are fairly low, nearly the lowest in Canada. A 16 year old student has the same insurance rate as his dad and grandfather (if they have the same driving record).

I was reading an article in another post how government is "a zero sum game at best".



Now it seems to me that this is a significant argument for government involvement in the insurance industry. To me, not only is this industry proving profitable for the province, it is keeping rates in check making driving affordable.

But I'm sure you right wingers are happy to be filling the pockets of your fat-cat insurance brokers who happen to be raising rates while hauling in record profits.

And it looks like better then a 0 sum game to me.

[karra]

Naturally government provided insurance keeps the left and far left nutters content. Something to do with having near proximity to the breast they never wanted to leave apparently. Could that be it? The answer to the worlds problems? As obvious as that?

Take a look at any province with government motor vehicle insurance - particularly Icky Bicky aka ICBC. If ever there was a more glaring example of what not to do - well Donald, I assure yawl, I'm not aware of it.

Government Insurance equals nothing other that another useless bloating bureaucracy susceptible to corruption, kick-backs, nepotism and other assorted n'er-do-wells than - more than yawl can quack a beak at.

$1:

And it looks like better then a 0 sum game to me.

Of course it does dear boy. . . . .

[Milton]

Yeah, yeah , sure. Corporations on the other hand are altruistic and honest and compassionate, I mean just look at Shell in Nigeria, and Enron in California, and Exxon in Alaska, and Upjohn in thalidomide, and Johns Mansville in asbestos, and Dupont in Bhopal. I mean how could a sane person doubt private enterprises good intentions given all this evidence of the good they have done?

[Rev_Blair]

Never mind all that Milton. It's true, but lets not confuse the neo-cons with too many facts. Let's just look at the graph. What four provinces have public insurance? Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and British Colombia. What four provinces have the lowest rates? Same answer.

It really isn't that complicated. The private companies insist on huge profits every year, if they don't show an increase their share prices go down. The public companies base their rates on how much they have to pay out...no profit necessary.

[Donny_Brasco]

karra karra:

Could that be it? The answer to the worlds problems?

Well, its a hell of alot better then any suggestions you've ever had. Did it ever occur to you that allowing people to be able to afford to drive their vehicles to work might actually help them find and keep a job and pay taxes?

Of course, you never thought of that. We actually have studied this. And it is true.

Not all of us are born with a silver spoon up our ass like you.

[karra]

$1:

Did it ever occur to you that allowing people to be able to afford to drive their vehicles to work might actually help them find and keep a job and pay taxes?

Did it ever occur to you that people who want to work might actually make their own arrangements? Did it ever occur to you that if a person cannot afford to purchase, operate, repair and insure a vehicle - that perhaps they shouldn't own one? Did it ever occur to you that owning a car is not a right? Did it ever occur to you that there are numerous other types and modes of transportation including but not limited to public transportation, bicycles, feet, rollerblades, skateboards and other conveyances too numerous to mention?

Of course you didn't Donald - that would be too obvious for the myopic hard left socialists amongst us, doncha think?

$1:

Not all of us are born with a silver spoon up our ass like you.

Your quackation above is 'right' on the money Donald. Some are in fact born with the proverbial spoon - others? Well, others appear to suffer the effects of perpetual poison ivy - constant itch that need scratching particularly noticeable when thinking is required. I hope you're not one of them Donald, why that would be just awful yeah?

$1:

We actually have studied this. And it is true.

mm, you/'we' 'actually' studied therefore it is true - if you say so. What else did you study Donald?

Butt if I may offer one piece of advice Donald - check out 'Economics 001 for Dummies', I know for a fact there are a couple of posters who have been stuck in chapter one far too long - let me know if you need any help with this wee waddling task Donald - always glad to help.

[mike2277]

A pretty graph and, without more information, pretty meaningless.

If the entire cost of the government run programs is being covered by premiums, then, obviously, this is the way to go. A hard look at the accounting practices (by outside auditors) of these programs is the only way to know for sure.

At any rate, we need to do something about auto insurance in Ontario.
As a driver with a SPOTLESS record, I'm paying much higher premiums at 39 years old than when I was 20. I'm not sure what the solution is. I don't trust the government to do the job anymore than I trust the insurance companies (which is not at all)

[Rev_Blair]

AutoPac in Manitoba and SGI in Saskatchewan are profitable most years, Mike. Nothing major, but they are in the black. We've seen minor rate reductions here over the couple of years as a result. I've heard the same about the government insurance program in BC.

Karra whined,

$1:

Did it ever occur to you that if a person cannot afford to purchase, operate, repair and insure a vehicle - that perhaps they shouldn't own one? Did it ever occur to you that owning a car is not a right? Did it ever occur to you that there are numerous other types and modes of transportation including but not limited to public transportation, bicycles, feet, rollerblades, skateboards and other conveyances too numerous to mention?

A lot of the lower-paying factory jobs in Winnipeg are out in industrial parks that do not have good, if any, access to public transport. Many entry-level jobs require people to have a vehicle, so do a lot of higher level jobs. Many people live in rural areas where there simply is no public transport.

After WWII we built a society based on the automobile. That leaves us with the reality that people need private transport to get to their jobs. By making automobiles too expensive for people in these jobs to own, you are preventing them from working.

The choices left to you now, Karra, are to suggest that increase the welfare rates so people who want to work but do not have the transportation to do so can live working-class lives; or to champion expensive government-subsidized transport to industrial areas 24 hours a day so people can get to work.

[Donny_Brasco]

karra karra:

Did it ever occur to you that there are numerous other types and modes of transportation including but not limited to public transportation, bicycles, feet, rollerblades, skateboards and other conveyances too numerous to mention?

Actually it has. Let me give you an example. We worked with a small city in Saskatchewan. This city is a growing and prosperous community with some real good entrepreneurs and smart civic leaders.

However these folks could not understand why, when they set up production facilities and factories in the industrial area creating jobs that require little or no skill (but paying reasonable wages) the folks, (mostly native) would not apply for, take or remain on the job in any great numbers. Especially given that there is a "poor" neighborhood of people living a few kilometers from that area.

So we come out and took a look at the demographics of the area. Many of the people they wanted to target for this unskilled labour were from an economically depressed background, native or not. They had mostly been raised in the "cycle of poverty" and many were from the depressed rural areas (especially reserves) and had a low level of education and work experience.

Given that, most of these people had never had the opportunity to be able to afford to own a vehicle. I'm not sure if you understand the socio-economic situation of most of our native reserves, but there are very few job opportunities there for anyone. Some of our small towns suffer from the same circumstances. So these people have moved to the poor end of the city to look for jobs to improve their lives.

They are however; caught in a tough situation once they reach the city. Once they find affordable housing they need to find jobs which are a close enough distance to get to based on the mode of transportation that they have available to them.

Now get your calculator out. Based on the modes of transportation available to an individual, that same individual will have exponentially greater (or less) ability to obtain or maintain a job.

Take walking for example. At an average pace it takes a person about an hour to walk 4 km. So if work is 4 km away a person needs to spend an additional 2 hours a day walking. Now, given that we don't always have the best weather in the world here in Saskatchewan, walking that distance every day is not always practical.

So the farther away the job opportunity, you can actually calculate a relationship between the distance between one's home, work and the chances that person will continue to walk that distance every day.

So we looked at the next option, busses. Now not that these people are not smart, that just didn't understand the dynamics of poverty. There were no busses running from the target community to this area. So logically, we pointed out that they had overlooked this. You know the surprising thing was, one of those people in particular noted that he had just assumed that folks had vehicles, as all the people he knew, grew up with and lived around had this luxury. (If you doubt this example take a look at a map of Regina and tell me how many KM's the industrial area is from the "hood" and then tell me how many busses run from the "hood" to that area. The answer is about 6-7 KM and a bus will bring you within 2 on average).

Now given that there are many modes of transportation, we understand that the easier we can create access to these jobs, the better the chance people will apply for, obtain and maintain employment at these facilities. So if people can afford to drive, then they can afford to travel greater distances to take jobs. And employers can create jobs greater distances away from the economic hubs, where land value, taxes and rent tend to be cheaper. Therefore they can make more money, pay more taxes and create more jobs.

Now that is SIMPLE ECONOMICS. So before preaching about taking an economics class, take one yourself (bitch).

[karra]

_blah_blah bleated:

$1:

A lot of the lower-paying factory jobs in Winnipeg are out in industrial parks that do not have good, if any, access to public transport. Many entry-level jobs require people to have a vehicle, so do a lot of higher level jobs. Many people live in rural areas where there simply is no public transport.

So?

$1:

After WWII we built a society based on the automobile. That leaves us with the reality that people need private transport to get to their jobs. By making automobiles too expensive for people in these jobs to own, you are preventing them from working.

Xly poor boy, if you read your history you would know different. Regardless of that, what makes you think automobiles are too expensive? Methinks 'tis time you took up 'Economics 001 for Dummies' again - although you've had possession of it for more than a year now you are definitely due, so next week there's a test and yes don't worry, it will be on Chapter One. Study hard, ok?

$1:

The choices left to you now, Karra, are to suggest that increase the welfare rates so people who want to work but do not have the transportation to do so can live working-class lives; or to champion expensive government-subsidized transport to industrial areas 24 hours a day so people can get to work.

Always the hard-done by socialist eh dude? This may come as a wee surprise to you but the human spirit is capable of overcoming enormous obstacles - why would either of your pink comrade-like suggestions warrant merit?

[Donny_Brasco]

mike2277 mike2277:

If the entire cost of the government run programs is being covered by premiums, then, obviously, this is the way to go.

Just look up either the SGI annual report or the CIC (Crown Investments Corporation) annual report. You will find out the rate of return for the taxpayers investment in insurance (and the other crowns) plus more information on the distance between the governemnt and these crowns.

Nothing is ever perfect, but the average person can afford to drive. And in Saskatchewan, that is important.

[karra]

Poor you Donald,

Always trying so hard to make the pieces of the puzzle fit, no?


Anyway, take a look at your quackation below:

$1:

So we come out and took a look at the demographics of the area.

I must say in your defense Donald, that was mighty big of you. And the bestest grammar too btw. . . .

$1:

So we looked at the next option, busses.

Missed an option Donald - an apparent one I would have thought, particuarly in view of the booming business and employment opportunities - whaddayathink?

I really would like to stay longer, and I may be back to look at this again, but I hear supper calling - well, it's not actually calling but I can smell it - chicken tonight Donald, nobody you know I hope - but if you're still in a crappy mood -



then why don't you go out and choke one yourself?

I know I've kinda left you hangin' Donald but pangs are setting in - happy quaking Donald, and btw. . . .

$1:

Now that is SIMPLE ECONOMICS. So before preaching about taking an economics class, take one yourself (bitch).

there's really no need to be like that.

[Donny_Brasco]

karra karra:

Regardless of that, what makes you think automobiles are too expensive? Methinks 'tis time you took up 'Economics 001 for Dummies' again

Who the hell do you think you are? Are you really that stupid?

CAA Manitoba CAA Manitoba:

The average annual cost of owning and operating a new car is estimated to be $6,262, according to CAA's 2002 Driving Costs brochure. This is nearly 10 percent of an average Canadian family's annual income of $63,818, as calculated by Stats Canada.

This may account for only 10% of you income (I'm assuming you have an average income despite your less then average intelligence) but in Manitoba to person making minimum wage ($13,910/year) damn right owning a vehicle is expensive. Hell, double that wage and owning a vehicle accounts for 25% of their wage.

So I think someone has become so near sighted and developed such a low self esteem that she needs to try to make her money and her skin colour and her unintelligible banter make other people feel lower. If it makes you feel better, I don't think you (Karra) are any better or any worse then anyone else, despite your ignorance.

[Donny_Brasco]

karra karra:

Missed an option Donald - an apparent one I would have thought, particuarly in view of the booming business and employment opportunities

Good point Karra, what does a bitch like you do during the winter anyways, need a job?



[align=center]Karra and her friends[/align]

[Rev_Blair]

Karra's down to personal attacks again, Donny. It's the only thing she can do with any competence whatsoever, and even at that she's pretty incompetent.