The Goat Pen

Interesting case: Progressive Auto Insurance helped defend their policy holder's killer in court:

The deceased's brother's blog:



The NYT's article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/your- ... tw-nytimes

Social media fallout article on CNNMoney:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/14/technol ... tml?iid=EL


I understand that Insurance, especially automobile insurance, has a seedy underbelly, but this mess seems especially egregious.


Tick, insider thoughts on Progressive in general and their actions in this?

I shoulda known better than to follow that link of prof's.

Well as a percentage how many US Citizens if they get an extra 10 dollars back from the local Wal Mart will make a trip back down there to give it to them? That's the same percentage that have the morals needed to vote for what is right for the country vs who can "give" them the most.

Jealousy and greed have worked for the liberals for many years and the more people that are addicted to other peoples money the easier that sell is, country be damned.

So In BOJ's view conservatives return the tenspot to Walmart while greedy libs use it to splurge on themselves. No doubt cranks on the left probably think the reverse is true.

Meanwhile politicians of both stripe maneuver rules so they can become (multi) millionaires without any fear of restraint (much less incarceration). The lobby money flows unabated (hundreds of millions)...insider trading is all the rage (hundreds of millions)...and the sweetest real-estate deals are swapped like baseball cards (hundreds of millions). So it's particularly amusing to hear someone like BOJ spout off about who has "the morals needed to vote for what is right."

AlabamAlum wrote:

Tick, insider thoughts on Progressive in general and their actions in this?

The biggest thing that stands out is why Progressive jumped the gun and assumed negligence for their insured (the dead girl) and paid the other three parties to the accident PRIOR to a court decision. That's stupid. If there's even a hint of shared negligence, each insurance carrier takes care of their own until the court has the final say - it's only common sense. In this case the ruling went in their insured's favor and now Prog wound up paying both sides. That's one for the books.

So then their dumbassery pre-court required them to be consistent and support the other party in court - an epic PR disaster since they logically had to fight their client's underinsured option. Again, what was their hurry? They were going to be out 100k either way the decision fell..

As an aside, independant agents built Progressive Auto into a powerhouse and as a show of thanks the company introduced Progressive Direct to basically cut the independant agents out. Karma!

bluetick wrote:

AlabamAlum wrote:

Tick, insider thoughts on Progressive in general and their actions in this?

The biggest thing that stands out is why Progressive jumped the gun and assumed negligence for their insured (the dead girl) and paid the other three parties to the accident PRIOR to a court decision. That's stupid. If there's even a hint of shared negligence, each insurance carrier takes care of their own until the court has the final say - it's only common sense. In this case the ruling went in their insured's favor and now Prog wound up paying both sides. That's one for the books.

So then their dumbassery pre-court required them to be consistent and support the other party in court - an epic PR disaster since they logically had to fight their client's underinsured option. Again, what was their hurry? They were going to be out 100k either way the decision fell..

As an aside, independant agents built Progressive Auto into a powerhouse and as a show of thanks the company introduced Progressive Direct to basically cut the independant agents out. Karma!

It has truly been a PR disaster for them. To make matters worse, the Progessive Claims General Manager said that the brother who wrote the blog was a liar (essentially) and that Progressive didn't defend the other party (and he was using "defend" in a strict legal sense), but it turns out that he was wrong about that, too:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/progress ... tastrophe/

You just can't get away with these type of things in 2012. The Internet allows people to scour court documents and find resumes and all sorts of info in seconds.

And then the smiling Flo spam in response to questions about this on Twitter:




A true PR nightmare.

I wouldn't fuck Flo with Wizards tiny dick.

You've seen my dick?

disturbing

You emailed me the pics idiot.

So how big an idiot is this Todd Akin guy? He's in good position to beat McCaskill, days away from the deadline to drop out, and he goes on tv to talk about how pregnancies can't occur from 'legitimate rape".

The National Republican Committee has vowed they are pulling all financial support from his campaign unless he quits immediately. He's got until 5PM tomorrow to decide.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/08 ... ml?hp=t1_3

That guy is too stupid to be a Senator. There are very few people who fit that description.

Agreed. The bar is very low, but somehow he tripped over it.

He shouldn't quit. The Republican party (and a number of pacs will eventually support him. In the meantime, he already has raised a lot of money and he's still likely to win.

So what is it about the Sea of Galilee that turns a bunch of staid GOP congressmen and women into Girls (and Guys) Gone Wild?

Bible stories make 'em horny

bluetick wrote:I shoulda known better than to follow that link of prof's.

Well as a percentage how many US Citizens if they get an extra 10 dollars back from the local Wal Mart will make a trip back down there to give it to them? That's the same percentage that have the morals needed to vote for what is right for the country vs who can "give" them the most.

Jealousy and greed have worked for the liberals for many years and the more people that are addicted to other peoples money the easier that sell is, country be damned.

So In BOJ's view conservatives return the tenspot to Walmart while greedy libs use it to splurge on themselves. No doubt cranks on the left probably think the reverse is true.

Meanwhile politicians of both stripe maneuver rules so they can become (multi) millionaires without any fear of restraint (much less incarceration). The lobby money flows unabated (hundreds of millions)...insider trading is all the rage (hundreds of millions)...and the sweetest real-estate deals are swapped like baseball cards (hundreds of millions). So it's particularly amusing to hear someone like BOJ spout off about who has "the morals needed to vote for what is right."

Umm actually no that's not even close to what I said.

I said it's a morals thing. If you think it's OK to steal 10 dollars from Wal Mart because "they made the mistake" or from the bank or whatever then you don't have the morals needed to vote for what's best for the country instead of what's best for themselves.

I then stated an indisputable fact, that the liberals have used greed and jealousy to their advantage for years (that's what class warfare and "wealth redistribution" are).

But you are the one that said liberals lacked morals. I didn't make a distinction, I said people that would steal that money lacked morals.

See the difference? By virtue of not taking the money back they proved they didn't have morals, specifically where other peoples money was concerned.

Other than Yoder skinny-dipping, what happened?

Big Orange Junky wrote:
I then stated an indisputable fact, that the liberals have used greed and jealousy to their advantage for years (that's what class warfare and "wealth redistribution" are).

But you are the one that said liberals lacked morals. I didn't make a distinction, I said people that would steal that money lacked morals.

See the difference? By virtue of not taking the money back they proved they didn't have morals, specifically where other peoples money was concerned.

The indisputible fact is that too many politicians use their position as overseers of the public trust to feather their own nest.

Whereas your $10 Walmart nonsense is pure fiction . Except now you'll tell me you personally know some oprama voter who cheated WM out of a tenner.

A liberal would never return a ten spot to Walmart because liberals hate Walmart and never shop there.

(And if they ever DID shop there, they would do so wearing a disguise, like Baptists do at the liquor store.)

AlabamAlum wrote:Other than Yoder skinny-dipping, what happened?

According to the AP, 20 other Republican lawmakers, staffers, and spouses went undie-dipping in the night surf. Boy/girl hijinx...not church-approved.

Professor Tiger wrote:A liberal would never return a ten spot to Walmart because liberals hate Walmart and never shop there.

(And if they ever DID shop there, they would do so wearing a disguise, like Baptists do at the liquor store.)

Correct.

Undie-dipping?

Dear lord, we're hungry for some real news. I guess that's good. What a non-story.