Sorry...had the same problem you did, prairiemoon. Here's a clean version: I've decided to make one last effort to acquaint you with the significance of economics in understanding the world around you and distinguishing between effective and ineffective solutions to society's many problems. But before I do that, let me first acknowledge that perhaps my efforts thus far reflect my limitations in clearly communicating my points. For example, when referencing Karl Marx, I was NOT intending to disparage you by labeling you a communist or inferring that you supported his views. Rather, I was trying to make the point that many times an apparently sensible principle such as those espoused by Mr. Marx (or you) can prove to be totally dysfunctional in practice as explained by economic principles. But I'd like to walk you through a specific example of the application of microeconomics (i.e., the application of economics on a small scale, as distinguished from macroeconomics which looks at issues affecting, say, the national economy). Here in California, we've had our share of droughts in the past and we were experiencing a particularly prolonged drought when I was in business school. People were being forced to cut their water usage by 20% or face stiff fines. We were being required to only water our lawns on alternate days. "Water police" were issuing citations when landscape runoff was found in the street. Because of the drought, we were told, there was simply not enough water to go around. My econ professor used the occasion to make a strong point about the importance of understanding economics. He proclaimed, "Our current water shortage has nothing whatsoever to do with the drought!" What??? How could that be??? Economics tells us that the most efficient way to allocate scarce resources is through a market exchange, where the price of a given good or service is determined by the price that a willing buyer will pay a willing seller. Such a system GUARANTEES that the supply of a given good or service will always be sufficient to meet the demand (except for very short-term, unanticipated distribution problems, such as supplying drinking water immediately following the Haitian earthquake or introducing virtually ANY new Apple product). So how could CA be experiencing a water shortage? Very simple. The Public Utilities Commission was unwilling to allow the price for water to be set by the marketplace. Their reasoning was paved with good intentions (as is the proverbial road to Hell). They didn't want the burden of a decreased supply of water to fall disproportionately on those least able to pay for it. And, after all, isn't water a necessity of life? Yet each of their "solutions" created its own set of problems. Restricting landscape irrigation placed a disproportionate burden on those with large properties while apartment residents could continue to take half-hour showers. Requiring a reduction in water usage from the prior year disproportionately punished those who had always conserved water and those who had recently put in a yard. And these regulations did NOTHING to increase the supply of water. If instead they had let the price of water rise to a level that reflected its scarcity, the demand for water would be brought into equilibrium with supply. Consumers would have reduced their consumption in response to the higher price (as occurred during last year's spike in gas prices) and there would have been adequate water for all those willing to buy it. But wait, you say...what about fairness? Is it fair that the poor, who may be least prepared to deal with an increase in water prices, assume such a disproportionate hit? Well, the poor already have to pay for all the other necessities of life: food, shelter, transportation, heating, etc. Why should water be any different? (And to restate a previous remark, a ten-fold increase in water prices would still mean less than $10/YEAR to stay alive.) Our free market system works because it forces those who would be satisfied with only the necessities of life to get off their duffs and contribute to society...or they'll starve, freeze, etc. (Thank God for Clinton putting an end to Johnson's ill-conceived War on Poverty, which expanded the ranks for the impoverished and nearly bankrupted the nation.) If we feel that some are UNABLE to provide for themselves, we can (and do) establish welfare programs, charities, homeless shelters, etc. to help them deal with the price of necessities. But using PRICE to allocate scarce resources gives each individual the freedom to make decisions on how he/she would prefer to allocate their scarce dollars. But even more important, price provides the capacity for us to actually increase a dwindling supply by providing an economic justification to drill new wells, import water from areas having an abundant supply, expand water conservation technology, build desalinization plants, plant xeriscape landscapes, etc. And unlike wishing and hoping that citizens would simply act on the need for conservation by being RESPONSIBLE, a market allocation of scarce resources ACTUALLY WORKS! But couldn't a group of evil rich meanies corner the market on water, driving the price higher to satisfy their own greed? Sure, that could happen. And that's where government has a role in preventing the manipulation of the marketplace and the creation of monopolies. It takes vigilance to keep markets free. A good example of our government's failure to do so is in allowing China's currency manipulation to capture a disproportionate share of the American market. Why aren't we more aggressive in stopping this? Because China buys off our politicians by purchasing Treasury bonds which enables them to finance their on-going deficit spending. Oops...sorry, I'm slipping into macroeconomics and politics. That's a much more involved lesson. Market solutions aren't perfect but, as Churchill said about democracy, "...the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried" (Of course, he also said, "The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." He might well have been referencing their ignorance of economics!) Dr. Granfield likely would be rather disappointed with the superficial job I've just done in recreating his lesson on CA's water shortage but I hope it's given you a flavor of some of the considerations in looking at society's challenges through the lens of economics. Any questions?

Here's a story from that time period that is also worth reading. History continues to repeat itself! The Limits of Madness by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. 12-01-03 For the first time in many years, I was speechless. I didnât know what to say. It was Thursday evening, on Thanksgiving. My wife Elisabeth, my son Anthony, plus other family members stood around the dinner table, gazing at me patiently, waiting for me to open my mouth. But I was mute. My problem was simple: Elisabeth had asked each of us to say a few words about what weâre thankful for. But by the time my turn came around, all the more important things in life �" health, happiness, and love �" had already been covered by the others. Little did they realize, during those moments of silence, that a torrent of thoughts was flashing through my mind, most of which I will share with you now ⦠THE TRUE PESSIMISTS Some people on Wall Street seem to think Iâm a die-hard pessimist �" that I have nothing to be thankful for. They call me a âperma-bearâ for ânever recommending stocksâ or âChicken Littleâ for âpredicting one disaster after another.â Well, I have news for them: Iâve been recommending stocks throughout the bear market and throughout the recent recovery. The main difference is my stocks went up; most of theirs went down and are STILL way down from their peaks. As to the disasters �" the dot.com bust, tech wreck, bankruptcy crisis, accounting scandals, and broker scandals �" guess what! They happened. But thatâs all water under the bridge. Right now ⦠LOOK AT WHAT THE âOPTIMISTSâ ARE SAYING! The so-called âoptimistsâ say Fed Chairman Greenspan will continue holding down interest rates, and Congress will continue spending us into prosperity. They say no one has to worry about �" or deal with �" the ballooning federal budget deficit, the record trade deficit, or the huge debt burden of millions of consumers. They think the sinking dollar is âno big deal,â and we should âjust let it fall.â They donât seem to give a darn that your interest income has been reduced to a pittance. Nor do they seem to care very much about the havoc inflation can wreck on your retirement. They tell you ânot to worryâ about the threat to your Medicare or the danger to your Social Security �" let alone to the other retirement benefits that were promised to you. Worst of all, they seem to think thereâs no significant connection between the shaky pillars of our economy and the equally shaky pillars of our society �" falling educational standards, deteriorating public health, broken families. And they say âMartin Weiss is a pessimistâ?! Give me a break! WHY I AM REALLY A DIE-HARD OPTIMIST A few seconds had gone by, and I could smell the Thanksgiving dinner spread out before me on the table, still steaming from the oven. Anthony looked at me expecting a profound �" or humorous �" statement. But I kept my words to myself and pursued my thoughts in silence ⦠I am an optimist because I love my country. Yes, I see trouble ahead, but I disagree vehemently with the idea that our society is going down the tubes. All of the trends we are witnessing today �" fiscal irresponsibility, massive debt build-ups, and social malaise �" are part of a single, growth-at-any-cost megatrend. But theyâre coming to a head. And when they do, we will confront them. We will resolve them. And we will move on to better and safer times. Admittedly, we are half mad, always pushing ourselves to extremes, to the limits of our technological and economic capacity. This week, for example, the U.S. Commerce Department announced that the economy spurted forward at a breakneck speed of 8.2% per year �" a phenomenon largely driven by government tax cuts and spending. Sounds great, right? But at the very same time, Moodyâs, one of the worldâs leading credit rating services, announced that, if our government continues cutting taxes and spending without restraint, the United States of America could lose its triple-a credit rating! Thatâs not good. Not even close. THE LIMITS TO OUR GOVERNMENTâS MADNESS Fact is we are NOT on the right path. But there is a LIMIT to how far we can go down this path, and, sooner or later, we WILL reach that limit. Thatâs when we will rise to the occasion, make the sacrifices, and move on. Take the budget deficit and inflation, for example. In other lands and in previous times, deficits and inflation could run amuck, almost without limitation. Kings or queens �" presidents or prime ministers �" had almost unlimited power to temporarily inflate their economies. They could print paper money to their heartâs content. They could destroy their currency, drive millions of citizens into abject poverty, invite wars of ruin ⦠even threaten the world. Youâve probably heard the stories about the German hyperinflation during the Weimar Republic, before Adolph Hitler rose to power. Thatâs when it took three TRILLION German realmarks to buy just one U.S. dollar. Thatâs when their paper money was so utterly devalued people needed wheelbarrows to cart their cash around. Once, a man parked his wheelbarrow of money in front of a store while he shopped. When he returned, he was shocked to discover that it had been stolen. More shocking, however, was the fact that all the money bundles were left behind, stacked neatly on the ground. Even the thief knew that the wheelbarrow had more value than the worthless bank notes. Plus, last week, I told you about the currency destruction that I personally experienced in Brazil as a young boy �" and how, over the years, their money was devalued by a factor of one quadrillion (a thousand trillion) to one. These are vital lessons from history we must learn, and we seem doomed to learn them the hard way: Our government today is running up its debt at a rapid pace, just like the previous governments of Brazil and pre-Nazi Germany. Our leaders seem willing to sacrifice our strong dollar in order to keep the people happy and stay alive politically, much like the leaders did back then. But, as I also told you last week, the United States is not Brazil. Nor is it Weimar Germany. Indeed, there is one, all-important, structural difference that separates those episodes of hyperinflation from the United States of today: THE DEBT MARKET Unlike Brazil and Weimar Germany, we have a huge, powerful, fully developed debt market. They didnât. A debt market is where investors buy and sell government bonds, corporate bonds, mortgages, bank loans, and other debts �" much like investors buy and sell stocks. As in any market, when sellers are more numerous or aggressive, prices go down. When buyers have the upper hand, prices go up. You probably know this already. But bear with me. You may not be aware of its ultimate implications. The primary hub of our huge debt market is downtown Manhattan �" in the large, cavernous trading rooms of major broker-dealers and banks like Merrill Lynch, Salomon Smith Barney, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Credit Suisse First Boston, and a few dozen others. Plus, thereâs a secondary hub �" in Chicago. Between Jackson Boulevard and Van Buren Street, the Chicago Board of Trade runs a 32,000-square-foot trading floor where, every day, they buy and sell futures contracts representing billions of dollars in U.S. government debt �" Treasury bonds and Treasury notes. About nine blocks to the north-northwest, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange operates two state-of-the-art trading floors for futures on Eurodollar deposits, Treasury bills, and other debt instruments �" also with billions of dollars changing hands each day. My point is this: The U.S. debt market is not just a small entity that exists on the periphery of our society. Itâs embodied in massive, tangible structures of concrete, marble, steel, and glass ⦠housing tens of thousands of staff ⦠and handling far more money than all the worldâs stock exchanges put together. Every day, millions of investors �" individuals, companies, cities, states, pension funds, universities, churches, and foreign countries �" buy and sell the debts in these huge markets. And every day, the market value of these debts goes up or down, depending on the supply of new debts being offered ⦠depending on the willingness of investors to buy them ⦠or ⦠contingent on the zeal of investors to get rid of their old ones. This goes far beyond the realm of money and finance. The debt market �" particularly the market for U.S. government bonds �" also serves as a de-facto POLITICAL FORUM, a place where U.S. government officials must ultimately answer for their sins. How? Itâs similar to what you saw recently in the stock market. Remember how wayward CEOs and CFOs faced their day of reckoning? Remember what happened to THEM when major accounting scandals were revealed? Investors dumped their shares like hot potatoes. Almost immediately, the companies either changed their ways or were smashed by the market forces. Heads rolled. Some CEOs were even marched off in handcuffs. A similar fate awaits wayward officials of the U.S. government �" but for them, it will be in the bond market. Sounds bad, doesnât it? But actually itâs a very good thing. Because it means there IS a LIMIT to their madness. You see, in other eras and other places, if you were unfortunate enough to lend your money to a reckless, irresponsible government, your choices were minimal: Youâd usually have to wait years until the bond matured. Then, if they paid you back in worthless money, tough luck! Unless you wanted to join a revolution, there was really nothing you could do about it. Today, thanks to the giant debt market, itâs another story entirely. FIRST, YOU DONâT HAVE TO WAIT. If youâre angry as all heck about the ballooning federal deficit, the threat of inflation, the sinking dollar, Medicare, Social Security, and anything else for that matter ⦠or ⦠if youâre worried the clowns in Washington are going to stiff you with cheaper money ⦠you donât have to just sit around and gripe about it. You can sell your bonds and get all or most of your money back at almost any time, almost any day. SECOND, POLITICS IS NO ISSUE. You donât have to hire a lobbyist. You donât have to run down to Washington to bang an angry fist on the desk of some faceless bureaucrat. You donât even have to wait for the next election. All you have to do is pick up the phone, call your broker, and utter one four-letter word: âSell!â THIRD, THE CENTER OF POWER HAS SHIFTED. Millions of people own bonds today. They own them directly in their IRAs, brokerage accounts, or trust accounts. Or they own them indirectly through a mutual fund, an insurance policy, a pension fund, or even a bank account. Any one of these investors or institutions has the power to utter that same four-letter word. SELL! This is so, so important. If you get nothing else out of my weekly âMartin on Monday,â you must get this. Because it means that ⦠THE ULTIMATE POWER TO DECIDE THE FATE OF OUR COUNTRY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM THE HANDS OF POLITICIANS INTO THE HANDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. THANK GOD! This ultimate power is more powerful than laws, even more powerful than the now-defunct gold standard which, in the old days, used to restrain how much paper money governments could print. And if youâre thinking the American people have never exercised that power, think again! THE GREAT BOND MARKET REBELLION OF 1980 The president was up for re-election, just as he is now. The economy was shaky, much as it is today. Except â¦. instead of a Republican in the White House, we had a Democrat �" Jimmy Carter. Whether Democrat or Republican, however, you would have expected him to do everything in his power to pump up the economy, make the people happy and get himself re-elected, right? Youâd think heâd do very much the same kinds of things President Bush is doing now, right? Indeed, the LAST thing youâd expect from Washington �" then or now �" is a hard right jab to the underbelly of the economy. Yet thatâs exactly what Carter gave us. He called in Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. Volcker slapped Draconian controls on virtually all forms of debt and credit created in America. They imposed stiff controls on credit cards, making it difficult for the average cash-poor American to spend a dime. They slapped controls on bank lending and business borrowing, making it hard for most companies to invest, hire, or buy raw materials. They even slapped controls on money market mutual funds, making it impossible for them to sell any more shares in existing funds. Within just a few short weeks, the economy was plunging. Gross national product nosedived. And Carterâs chances for re-election were forever doomed. Ronald Reagan became our next president. And the rest is history. âBut why,â you ask? What invisible, mysterious force could have possibly driven a Democratic president ⦠up for re-election just months away ⦠desperate to pursue his vision of the world for another four years ⦠to suddenly and deliberately sabotage an already-shaky economy? Was he possessed by aliens from outer space? Did he go bananas? Not quite. Hereâs how it happened: In 1979, the government was pumping up the economy with easy money and rampant government spending. Inflation was heating up. So, millions of people who had invested in U.S. government bonds were spooked ⦠and angry. They called their brokers. They uttered that powerful, four-letter word. And the market price of U.S. government bonds �" especially long-term bonds �" crashed. It all came to a head in February of 1980. The Soviets had invaded Afghanistan. There were rampant fears of another expensive arms race. Inflation was soaring into double digits. And the bond market crashed again. In desperation, a delegation of major New York bond dealers �" including Merrill Lynch and Salomon Brothers �" made a pilgrimage to the White House. A few hours later, a dozen powerful Wall Street men in three-piece suits sat before the president in the Oval Office. I donât know exactly what they said, but hereâs the gist: âWe have a message for you,â they declared to Carter. âThe message is from the millions of government bond investors in America and all over the world. You know �" the people who have been loaning you the money you desperately need to run this country.â âOh, really?â Carter asked solemnly. âWhat are they saying?â âTheyâre saying theyâre fed up with the governmentâs reckless spending and with the inflation thatâs destroying the value of their bonds. Theyâre saying theyâre not patsies and they wonât sit back passively when theyâre paid back with worthless dollars. Their message to you is simple: âEither you end the inflation now �" RIGHT now �" or weâre not lending you any more of our money.ââ Carter was stunned. âIs it really that bad?â âNo. Itâs worse. Now, these investors arenât just refusing to buy your new bonds. Theyâre also SELLING back the OLD bonds they bought previously ⦠dumping âem on the market in torrents. That drives their prices down and the interest rates you have to pay through the roof! Thatâs why your 30-year Treasury bond has plunged to a meager 50 cents on the dollar! Thatâs why youâre going to have to a whopping 13% interest for long-term money, over 16% for short-term money!â Carter still didnât get it. So the delegation from Wall Street explained further. âLook! Your Treasury bonds are crashing in value. No oneâs buying âem and everyoneâs selling âem. Weâre having trouble selling even a small lot of $5 million. Itâs getting so bad, bond dealers like us are getting ready to quit.â âWhy should I care?â âBecause you canât survive without us. We are the ONLY ones in the world who can sell your bonds to the public ⦠to raise the cash you need. And now WE ARE SHUTTING DOWN. Weâve lost so much money holding inventories of your Treasury bonds weâre running out of capital. We canât afford to be your dealers any more. Weâre going broke!â âBut what do you want me to do?â âYouâve got to stop the value of the dollar from falling, end the inflation �" even if that sabotages the recovery.â âBut what about the election next November?â Carter asked under his breath. âForget about next November. Unless you can convince bond investors that youâre going to end this inflation, you wonât be able to borrow the cash you need to meet government payroll next WEEK! The entire government will have to shut down �" right now.â THE NEXT BOND MARKET REBELLION Finally, Carter got the message. And thatâs when he gave Fed Chairman Volcker the green light to do whatever he needed to squash the inflation �" even if that meant squashing the economy too. Can something like this happen again? You bet it can! Fast forward two decades and three years �" to December 2003. Once again, government spending is running amuck ⦠Once again, Wall Street is beginning to worry about the consequences (remember what Moodyâs has just announced!) ⦠Once again, bond investors are getting ready to start selling ⦠And when they do, GOVERNMENT BOND PRICES WILL CRASH AGAIN! Ultimately, the president and the Fed Chairman will face the same stark choices that Carter and Volcker did in 1980: Stop the fiscal madness ⦠or ⦠shut down the government! I have no doubt they will choose the former. I am also very hopeful that it will be just the first of many steps to confront and resolve the Medicare crisis, Social Security crisis, and others that loom in the not-too-distant future. But alas, our leaders will probably not start to make the right choices until AFTER theyâre up against a major, life-threatening crisis. Thatâs the nature of the beast. They push it to the limit, and then they change their ways only under extreme duress ⦠* when inflation is already surging toward double digits ⦠* when the dollar has been beaten down to painfully low levels ⦠* when foreign investors are dumping their U.S. investments by the boatload ⦠* when sky-high interest rates are strangling the U.S. economy ⦠* And when the bond market has been beaten down so dramatically, the market mechanism itself is on the brink of shutting down. Itâs a frightening, maddening scenario. But be thankful that there is a limit to the madness. It WILL end �" and for the better. In the meantime, be sure youâre protected �" And hold onto your hat. Itâs going to be one heck of a ride. " A link that might be useful: www.moneyandmarkets.com/the-limits-of-madness-8841

While it would be nice if your own insurance agent - whom one would expect to be schooled in these matters - would be willing to offer his advice regarding the language in the release from the contractor's insurance company, I kind of doubt he will do so because that would be practicing law without a license. Your did exactly the right thing in emailing a request for further information and an explanation. As an attorney, I can tell you that it is not unusual for language there to be language stating that one has received money in settlement when the check has not yet been cut. In theory the signing of the release and the receipt of the settlement check are SUPPOSED to occur simultaneously - which is easy to do when one sits down with the other party to sign documents but impossible when things are done by mail. If neither side trusts the other to follow thru, then a sit-down becomes absolutely necessary. It strikes me that your contractor MUST have a local insurance agent to whom the insurance company could send the settlement check and you could then sit-down with the contractor's local agent to sign the paperwork and pick up your check. As for providing a copy of your driver's license, an alternative is to have your signature on the release documents notarized by a notary public who will verify that you are who you say you are. All banks will have a notary available. You could agree to meet up with the contractor's agent in the lobby of your bank, have your bank's notary witness your signature on the release and get your settlement check. As for the final paragraph - it is what is known as a "subrogation clause". Basically it means that if your own insurance company (company A) has already reimbursed you for the damages and your insurance company demands the contractor's insurance company (company B) pay them back, then company B can demand that you give them back the money they paid you. The contractor's insurance company should not have to pay twice for the same damage and you should not be allowed to collect twice. Their subrogation clause could probably be worded better to make it clearer that it is NOT intended to mean that the contractor could demand that you pay his extra premiums if/when the insurance company raises his rates because of your claim. You are right that the contractor is one of the "released parties" so, strictly speaking, I suppose the language COULD be stretched to mean that you would have to pay the contractor's increased premiums - although I doubt that any court would interpret it that way. Perhaps you could insist that they modify the subrogation clause to read: FURTHER, I agree to reimburse and indemnify all released parties of any amounts which any insurance carriers, government entities, hospitals or other persons or organizations THAT ARE NOT RELEASED PARTIES may recover from them in reimbursement for amounts paid to me or on my behalf as a result of this accident by way of CONTRIBUTION, SUBROGATION, INDEMNITY or OTHERWISE. Be sure to insist that the inserted clause say "that are not released parties" rather then "which are not released parties." (The reason has to do with the restrictive versus non-restrictive nature of clauses beginning with "that" versus "which." Alternatively, perhaps you could insist that they add a sentence after the subrogation clause saying: The foregoing does not apply to any amounts which one released party may recover from another released party. BTW - I applaud you for carefully reading the documents they sent you and making sure you understood them before you signed! Hope this helps

Well, I'm in Western Australia and enjoying daylight saving. The weather is still the same no matter what the hour, daylight saving doesn't make the days any hotter, some opinions to the contrary :-). My husband, who installs TV antennas, is enjoying the fact that with daylight saving there is a little more time during the morning when it is cool enough to work in and on a roof without being turned into a crisp. There is also more light time in the evenings for finishing off jobs. I am enjoying the fact that I can get all our evening watering done while it is still light enough to see what I'm doing. My adult daughter enjoys that she can go to the gym in the evening and not come out to a dark car park. Yes, we get up in the dark but we do that in winter anyway and its no big deal. Certainly it is easier dealing with businesses on the other side of the country (where a lot of the head ofices are based) with a two hour rather than a three hour time difference.