Could there be a insurance company default because of the Coronavirus?

[morganist]

So are you claiming that it was your idea for the UK Pension System to buy corporate paper? Which of your novel ideas did the UK government adopt at your behest? Were you on the Blair Task Force? Or are you just claiming credit for something that the UK system has already been doing? Where are you cited in the LSE and Oxford white papers on the UK pension system?

I wrote a paper in 2006 called the Pension Problem and the Current Pension Rebate. The work put forward the macroeconomic workings, theories and concepts of pension saving alterations to control inflation instead of interest rate alterations. The paper also put forward recommendations for pension fund investment criteria to be introduced to reduce the rate of risk and increase the number of fixed return investments to stabilise pension income, especially for annuities - I now terms this 'Spending Variance Tightening'.

The paper also put forward recommendations for reforms in the Registered Pension Schemes Manual. The 2006 paper along with subsequent papers in additions to articles and massive amounts of correspondence have led to many of the recommendations being adopted. I have letters thanking me for the work from the various government ministers including the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, it has been approved by parliament for publication demonstrating its legitimacy as evidence of my influence.

There is a clear reference to the recommendations I put forward in my book portfolio, published articles and the use of the work in the official governmental documentation for pension taxation. The Registered Pension Schemes Manual was reformed so much it is now entitled the Pension Tax Manual. The use of alterations in the annual and lifetime pension allowance rates appear to be the method of choice for inflationary, deflationary and economic growth control in the United Kingdom over the last decade. The evidence being the interest rate was the same rate for a seven year period and was kept below 1% for the entire decade.

During that time massive pension reform was made and the economic growth target was hit along with the inflation target. The interest rate was allowed to remain low during inflationary periods keeping government debt interest payments low and unemployment was reduced by pension pumping during deflationary periods. All of my books contain work that has been adopted or influenced government policy and the book the Pension Problem, now, 'Modern Applied Macroeconomics' is approved by government for global publication.

 

[bone]

What was your doctoral thesis?

I ask because you present yourself as a macroeconomist.

I wrote a paper in 2006 called the Pension Problem and the Current Pension Rebate. The work put forward the macroeconomic workings, theories and concepts of pension saving alterations to control inflation instead of interest rate alterations. The paper also put forward recommendations for pension fund investment criteria to be introduced to reduce the rate of risk and increase the number of fixed return investments to stabilise pension income, especially for annuities - I now terms this 'Spending Variance Tightening'.

The paper also put forward recommendations for reforms in the Registered Pension Schemes Manual. The 2006 paper along with subsequent papers in additions to articles and massive amounts of correspondence have led to many of the recommendations being adopted. I have letters thanking me for the work from the various government ministers including the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, it has been approved by parliament for publication demonstrating its legitimacy as evidence of my influence.

There is a clear reference to the recommendations I put forward in my book portfolio, published articles and the use of the work in the official governmental documentation for pension taxation. The Registered Pension Schemes Manual was reformed so much it is now entitled the Pension Tax Manual. The use of alterations in the annual and lifetime pension allowance rates appear to be the method of choice for inflationary, deflationary and economic growth control in the United Kingdom over the last decade. The evidence being the interest rate was the same rate for a seven year period and was kept below 1% for the entire decade.

During that time massive pension reform was made and the economic growth target was hit along with the inflation target. The interest rate was allowed to remain low during inflationary periods keeping government debt interest payments low and unemployment was reduced by pension pumping during deflationary periods. All of my books contain work that has been adopted or influenced government policy and the book the Pension Problem, now, 'Modern Applied Macroeconomics' is approved by government for global publication.

 

[morganist]

What was your doctoral thesis?

I ask because you present yourself as a macroeconomist.

You don't have to have a PHD to be a macroeconomist, there is no professional qualification to be a macroeconomist. I have my own school of economic thought that has been used successfully in the United Kingdom over the last decade. I have a book portfolio that explains the work in detail that has a letter in it from the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, thanking me for the work and stating his intention to use it. The paper, which is now a book has been used, reviewed, approved and authorised by all of the government departments, politicians and institutions involved in its use and application. It has also been approved by parliament for global publication and has the correct attributions and declarations contained.

I find it unfair that if someone produces work, which is then used and acknowledge to the level that the Pension Problem was applied in the United Kingdom that you would say that it has not been used due to the process of the work's production being outside of your approval. So are you saying that before Oxford and Cambridge were created or any other economic model was used around the world that did not stem from an Oxford or Cambridge published paper that it is not economic work or used economic work by a government even if it has their acknowledgement and approval of its use in practice? The work that matters is the work used by the government that is acknowledged and approved by them, I have that.

 

[JSOP]

Is this not a default of another sort, in that the insurance company does not pay out on its claims. In any event the whole function of insurance is derailed if this scenario happens, which could be more damaging than an individual insurance company default. Why pay for insurance if you do not get to claim it?

That's the whole idea that's in operation right now. You pay for insurance but you always have to be prepared that you won't be able to claim it. LOL It really depends on the insurance companies categorize this pandemic. It's something unforeseeable, sudden, spontaneous not through the fault of any man-made actions on any part of any Americans (in China yes the virus was really contracted by disturbing a specie of wild animals that have done their utmost best to stay out of us humans' way) and on a massive scale. All I am saying is this is a possible strategy that insurance companies can take and they have taken that before.