National opens ACC to private sector

[spacemonkey]

One side effect of the current Queensland flooding is how its shown the true colours of the Australian insurance industry..... The crowd Key and Co wish to sell ACC to.
Have a read of this;
http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2011/01/...lassy-atlases/

It makes sense, as an insurer, to decline to offer cover for anything which might actually cost money; and there abides a regulatory environment which permits insurers to do just this. The topic, and related problems resulting from poor government policy, are covered in some detail in a column by La Trobe University disaster researcher Rachel Carter in today’s Australian. Consequently, despite the present floods being declared the most severe disaster in Queensland’s history and with some discussion today that it may be the worst in the history of the Commonwealth, insurers were, a few days ago, saying that the losses to their industry would be modest.

[RiderInBlack]

One side effect of the current Queensland flooding is how its shown the true colours of the Australian insurance industry..... The crowd Key and Co wish to sell ACC to.
Have a read of this;
http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2011/01/...lassy-atlases/

Apsolutly no surprise there. What do ya really expect from Big Insurance Companies But hey if NZérs don't get off their Lazy Arses, that's exactly what we will get. It's not as if any major Party has come to the fore to oppose the sell of ACC strongly in Public, or to defend the Woodhouse Principals on which ACC was based. Nor has there been a hue-in cry from the Media about this. Not so much as a 20/20, 60minutes. Close-up or Campbell Live. Where is the Fair Go to make a Target of National's move to privatise ACC? No where to be seen. The Public have been sucked in and sold on the idea via the Media for sometime now. If we all don't wake-up soon, it will come and go with least of a whimper than the GST raise did.
The Public animal is such a sucker, and Politicians play us for all we are worth. They rip us off and make it look like it was our idea in the first place. They quite happily tell you that we can't afford this or that, and in the same breath give themselves pay raises.

[StoneY]

One side effect of the current Queensland flooding is how its shown the true colours of the Australian insurance industry..... The crowd Key and Co wish to sell ACC to.
Have a read of this;
http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2011/01/...lassy-atlases/

Man...poor bloody Aussies
No shit I really feel for our neighbours in this,my own brother watched the watres creep up his lawn, he is one of the fortunate ones it started receeding at his doorstep (no shit the boittom step was wet)

He is a lucky bastard...he really is

[RiderInBlack]

Have added:
ACC privatisation: Let the fightback begin

to my facebook.

So when will we wake-up and smell the roses? Most likely just after they have gone!

[RiderInBlack]

Decision to privatise ACC a bad one say nurses

From New Zealand Nurses Organisation (NZNO).
Humph, most of the ones ((Nurses) I work with have no idea that this is happening right under their noses.

[StoneY]

Have added:
ACC privatisation: Let the fightback begin

to my facebook.

So when will we wake-up and smell the roses? Most likely just after they have gone!

Yep added to mine too man cheers for link

[spacemonkey]

Also added to me farcebook page.

[Winston001]

One side effect of the current Queensland flooding is how its shown the true colours of the Australian insurance industry..... The crowd Key and Co wish to sell ACC to.....

Apsolutly no surprise there. What do ya really expect from Big Insurance Companies But hey if NZérs don't get off their Lazy Arses, that's exactly what we will get. It's not as if any major Party has come to the fore to oppose the sell of ACC strongly in Public, or to defend the Woodhouse Principals on which ACC was based. Nor has there been a hue-in cry from the Media about this. Not so much as a 20/20, 60minutes. Close-up or Campbell Live.....blah blah.....

Tell me: where has the government stated it proposes to sell the Accident Compensation and Rehabilitation Corporation? Or its assets?

That did not happen either in 1999.

[Brian d marge]

whats wrong with just buggerin off ,

its easy once you try

grass IS greener over the other side



Stephen

[mashman]

Tell me: where has the government stated it proposes to sell the Accident Compensation and Rehabilitation Corporation? Or its assets?

That did not happen either in 1999.

They are selling it's financial assets because they are opening the ACC's 100% market share (MONOPOLY ASSET) up to private competition...

[Winston001]

They are selling it's financial assets because they are opening the ACC's 100% market share (MONOPOLY ASSET) up to private competition...

Nope. ACC has $11 billion in assets. Furthermore ACC is not being disbanded, liquidated, or sold. There is no sale.

The government proposes that only the employment cover be open to competition from insurance companies. Not the non-earners account (general cover for every person), not the motor-vehicle account, nor the treatment injury account. That still leaves a huge amount of cover with ACC.

And finally, ACC will continue to provide work cover for employers who stay with it.

[Winston001]

Let me just repeat that I disagree with the government's stance. I believe ACC is a world-leading compensation system and should not be tampered with.

Still, if we are going to discuss and oppose the government's plans, we need to be accurate on the facts.

The govt believes ACC is inefficent and charges too much for work cover. There are certainly plenty of people on here and in the news who criticise ACC. So if the cost of compensation is reduced by insurance companies (as happened in 1999), how could anyone think that was a bad thing? Its like reducing tax - everyone wants to pay less.

You can't criticise or invoke conspiracy theories when the objective is to lower the amount you pay. Who would ever want to pay more??

Personally I think they are wrong, but can understand the commonsense in the proposal.

[mashman]

Nope. ACC has $11 billion in assets. Furthermore ACC is not being disbanded, liquidated, or sold. There is no sale.

The government proposes that only the employment cover be open to competition from insurance companies. Not the non-earners account (general cover for every person), not the motor-vehicle account, nor the treatment injury account. That still leaves a huge amount of cover with ACC.

And finally, ACC will continue to provide work cover for employers who stay with it.

Sorry W, just had to nip out for a bit... Anyhoo... My reasoning... Opening up ACC to competition does many things to ACC, one of which is the "back door sell off" of ACC assets. Obviously that demands an explanation.

The profitable account, according to Pricky boy, is opened up to competition. Instead of 100% of revenue, ACC will now "share" the market. For arguments sake, let's say that it's more likely the it'll be the higher earners that leave ACC and go elsewhere (i doubt that'll be that far from the truth, as private insurance premiums are higher )... So, the average ACC levy is going to go through the roof as they've lost masses of revenue to the competition. I think we can call that "fact"?

Those who stay with ACC will still need their claims covered. But with less revenue they will have to start dipping in to that $11 billion of assets to pay the bills. By default, they are selling ACC's financial assets.

[mashman]

You can't criticise or invoke conspiracy theories when the objective is to lower the amount you pay. Who would ever want to pay more??

Those who believe that they aren't, or won't, getvalue for money. ACC's brand is damaged. I know too many people that would prefer to go private, so the "demand" is there...

[Brian d marge]

Let me just repeat that I disagree with the government's stance. I believe ACC is a world-leading compensation system and should not be tampered with.

Still, if we are going to discuss and oppose the government's plans, we need to be accurate on the facts.

The govt believes ACC is inefficent and charges too much for work cover. There are certainly plenty of people on here and in the news who criticise ACC. So if the cost of compensation is reduced by insurance companies (as happened in 1999), how could anyone think that was a bad thing? Its like reducing tax - everyone wants to pay less.

You can't criticise or invoke conspiracy theories when the objective is to lower the amount you pay. Who would ever want to pay more??

Personally I think they are wrong, but can understand the commonsense in the proposal.

If it is opened up to competition , then its a win win , for the Govenment Acc becomes a SOE , pays the market rates to which the market will set

The returns made By the now ACC co Ltd will return to the General office of Circumlocution slush fund and all will be well.

If it is opened up and run like a business , it may well be up for sale or opened to investors ,, which is what the IMF have said all along , this is a vehicle for the profits or returns to go overseas , with we the people getting a large dose of lose lose

I have ( have to have ) private health care here in Japan , and on a daily basis , its great

Teeth , wisdom out , hundred bucks roughly

cap on tooth , 40 dollars

X-ray , 40 dollars

Health check ( over 40 must have ) free

waambulaance ride , free


But if you need a drug or care outside of list ,,, no not happening , and babies ,,,say put until Monday as it cost more during the weekend ( 1100 dollars )

Stephen

Ps I am all for saving money ,,,, but