In case you recently had an experience with an insurance company that was not supernova levels of rage-inducing and are feeling even moderately OK about them, here is a thing to remind you that their main job is to make sure to NOT pay you for losses because that fucks with their bottom line.
They don't all cost the same . . . There's the 10% vig either way, but if you ordered a copy in favor of the Sox, and they lose, you're on the hook for the whole wager.
<strong>Jack Lew</strong><i>(rifling through supply closet)</i>: Are we out of terrorism certificate paper again? You guys have got to stop using that to score your bridge games!
AZW88 (above) is on to something here. Many &quot;standard&quot; business insurance policies (those that are not written to specifically cover terrorism) have clauses that exempt from coverage riot, civil insurrection, acts of terror, et. al.
SO - if the US Treasury were to declare the Boston Bombing an Act of Terror would it negate coverage other businesses have already received?
Personally, I suspect the insurance company claiming the US Treasury must first declare it to be a act of terror is bogus. One would have to read the policy to find out.
It&#039;s only terrorism if you scream some argle-bargle nonsense about being oppressed right before you shoot. May need to add flags/book burning in some areas.
If they had called it &quot;health <i>insurance</i> reform&quot;, it would have 110% support. No one would be against it.
Where&#039;s Bob Parr when you need some insurance folks thrown through a wall?
They don&#039;t all cost the same . . . There&#039;s the 10% vig either way, but if you ordered a copy in favor of the Sox, and they lose, you&#039;re on the hook for the whole wager.
It was in Boston, it was terrierism.
<strong>Jack Lew</strong><i>(rifling through supply closet)</i>: Are we out of terrorism certificate paper again? You guys have got to stop using that to score your bridge games!
AZW88 (above) is on to something here. Many &quot;standard&quot; business insurance policies (those that are not written to specifically cover terrorism) have clauses that exempt from coverage riot, civil insurrection, acts of terror, et. al.
SO - if the US Treasury were to declare the Boston Bombing an Act of Terror would it negate coverage other businesses have already received?
Personally, I suspect the insurance company claiming the US Treasury must first declare it to be a act of terror is bogus. One would have to read the policy to find out.
It&#039;s only terrorism if you scream some argle-bargle nonsense about being oppressed right before you shoot. May need to add flags/book burning in some areas.