Republicans are stupid thieves.

[EricF]

What is your life worth? Can you be compensated for your life with money? Were you to lose your head in a car crash, would it make any difference to you whether the accident was your fault or the other guy's?

This is a complete and utter strawman. Yes you can be compensated for your life with money; it is paid to your beneficiaries or next of kin. But they are not requiring people buy life insurance, they are requiring liability insurance for property and bodily injury losses.

And those services are both easily valued, and are frequently expensive. So if a poor person were involved in a loss (and they are, every day. I handle them.) how would you expect them to compensate the person whose property they damaged, if they already don't have any money?

Well then. It is a risk. The alternative is to put the poor who are unable to work due to transportation limits on the dole. Fair enough.

Of course you can for a small premium insure against accidents with an uninsured motorist.

Drive carefully, keep both hands on the wheel, and your eyes on the road. The life you save may be your own.

And you know insurance gives rise to moral hazard. - Why be so careful? I'm insured.

I'm not sure we should go putting people on the dole because they have no insurance. If they are so poor they cannot afford basic liability coverage, chances are that owning and insuring an automobile is the least of their worries.

One caveat though: Not all states offed uninsured motorist coverage, either for bodily injury, property, or both. Some of them don't offer underinsured motorist coverage either. (the policies, and hence coverages insurance companies can sell is dictated by that state's respective Dept to Insurance). For example, where I live in AL, we have uninsured motorist bodily injury coverage, but not uninsured motorist property damage coverage.

It could be worse though, I could live in Michigan which is a true no-fault state: if someone hits your vehicle, the only thing you can claim against their insurance is a $500 mini-tort (and then only if you have a deductible or no insurance. You can have broad-form collision coverage which waives any deductible if you are less then 50% at fault). So if you don't carry collision coverage and are not at fault and have a lot of damage, your basically SOL.

The entire auto insurance industry is a mess, but I think requiring basic liability insurance in order to drive is one of the good laws.

[MSimon]

The entire auto insurance industry is a mess, but I think requiring basic liability insurance in order to drive is one of the good laws.

You will be paying the cost for those uninsured either way. They will be on the road illegally or on the dole.

The whole idea is that there are risk free choices. Or ways to reduce the financial risk. And it can be done by passing laws.

[EricF]

It's not just about financial risk to me, it becomes an issue of justice when one person cannot compensate someone who they have done financial or bodily damage to.

[Diogenes]

What is your life worth? Can you be compensated for your life with money? Were you to lose your head in a car crash, would it make any difference to you whether the accident was your fault or the other guy's?

That is a ridiculous argument, sorry. I might just as well ask you, whether, I put a bullet into your head, would you be mad at me?

A better analogy would be that someone drops a rock on your head. It doesn't matter if the person did it on purpose or by accident, Either way, you are still at a loss for your head. Whether you are mad or not (assuming you survive) will not improve the damage to your head.

But, when you get injured and you have that injury resulting in medical costs (especially important in the US) and or loss of business profit, then this is a relevant question. And yes, I would want to be compensated for that.

Everyone wants their problems solved, but why should they always expect someone else to solve them? If you fear being disabled or losing profits or paying large medical bills, shouldn't YOU take steps to deal with it?

If you feel so strongly about damage to your vehicle that you would deny other people's right to travel on the public roads, then you should pay for insurance to cover you, and let others do the same.

Actually, I would, but it is a lot more expensive than the basic coverage that is required. Also, I do have an accident insurance and an insurance that pays me in case I cant do my business due to an illness. They cost rather little actually and are totally worth the money, as I found out about a year ago.

The "Insure your own vehicle insurance"(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-fault_insurance) might be cheaper than the current "Insure everyone else's vehicle" insurance if it were not distorted by the "Economic Pollution" of the "Insure everyone else's vehicle" system currently in many states.

This is more reasonable, but still doesn't address the issue of why a poor man should be deprived of an ability to make a living just to protect another man's pretty car?

As I said, he can most certainly afford that. If he cant then he is not working, has never been working and therefore does not have a problem with not making it to his job anyway. As I said before, the basic car insurance is cheap. If you have problems paying for it, then cut the cable TV. Plus it is about injuries as well, not just the car. I find it quite apalling that you are trying to lower the issue to just the value of a car.

The medical portion of the insurance will only cover relatively minor injuries. Anyone having a serious injury could easily have medical bills 10 times as much as the maximum payment. (And yet they still risk it.)

We can pay lip service to the idea that the medical portion is meaningful to any degree, but the stark reality is that the insurance really addresses the damage to the other person's vehicle, and relatively minor medical injuries.

I know people who can barely feed themselves, let alone pay insurance. Should we all be better were they on the public dole?

Well in that case, your system certainly has issues, I can tell you that. Here noone, even those who do not have a job, have such problems. Unless there is something else seriously wrong here, I cant see that to be true. I can see people having problems affording health insurance in the current system, yes, because that is actually very expensive right now, but car insurance? Try pulling someone elses leg.

Ha ha ha... you're pulling your own leg! I know a woman who works at Whataburger. At $7.25/ hour, she makes $1160.00/ month before taxes. Figure $300.00/ month off the top for FICA and Taxes. A typical apartment might cost $450.00/ month. Figure $10.00/ day for food = $300.00/ month. Let's give her her water and electricity for free. This leaves $110.00 / month to spend on everything else. (Toilet paper? Soap? etc.) This particular woman has an infant granddaughter that she has been taking care of. She gets food stamps, does certain other nefarious things to get additional money. She catches rides from friends to get her to work.

I wonder how they pay for the gas/oil/inspection/repairs etc, if they cant afford insurance.

They don't. When the woman above HAD a car, she couldn't keep gas in it. She would occasionally get gas money from friends who wanted a ride. Inspections are no longer required in this state, and *I* fixed her car for her several times for free. She didn't even try to get insurance. She finally blew the engine, (Water pump seal failed and leaked out the coolant and she kept driving it with steam coming out of the hood.) and the car ended up in the junk yard.

Believe it or not, people in this situation are common enough.

[mad_derek]

Yes, well ... as ChrisMB has pointed out we have compulsory insurance in UK with tow and crush rules for non compliance. I've just looked at one of my policies and the limit for third party damages is £20,000,000 (and I do mean 20 million pounds) for a premium of £249.75 per annum - oh and my car is covered whatever happens (I'll leave you guys to do the currency conversions - if I do it it'll be wrong in five minutes).

[EricF]

Yes, well ... as ChrisMB has pointed out we have compulsory insurance in UK with tow and crush rules for non compliance. I've just looked at one of my policies and the limit for third party damages is £20,000,000 (and I do mean 20 million pounds) for a premium of £249.75 per annum - oh and my car is covered whatever happens (I'll leave you guys to do the currency conversions - if I do it it'll be wrong in five minutes).

20 million pounds? What the heck are you driving, a tractor trailer?

[Diogenes]

What is your life worth? Can you be compensated for your life with money? Were you to lose your head in a car crash, would it make any difference to you whether the accident was your fault or the other guy's?

This is a complete and utter strawman. Yes you can be compensated for your life with money; it is paid to your beneficiaries or next of kin. But they are not requiring people buy life insurance, they are requiring liability insurance for property and bodily injury losses.

I know a police officer who is currently lying in a hospital (over a year later) and is paralyzed from the neck down. How is the other guy's insurance helping him? Did the other guy's insurance save his neck?

Who bears the most responsibility, the person who packs a parachute or the person who jumps with it? *


Did the officer not know that his neck might be broken if he road on the public roads? Yes. Did he do it anyway? Yes. Did the other guy's insurance fix his broken neck? No. Would it fix or replace his pretty automobile? Yes.

People need to get some perspective.

[
And those services are both easily valued, and are frequently expensive. So if a poor person were involved in a loss (and they are, every day. I handle them.) how would you expect them to compensate the person whose property they damaged, if they already don't have any money?

They cannot. Neither can they fix the man's broken neck. Why should we live our lives in fear of poor people not being able to pay for our cars or fix our broken necks?


*(*I* am the author of this witticism . )

[MSimon]

It's not just about financial risk to me, it becomes an issue of justice when one person cannot compensate someone who they have done financial or bodily damage to.

There is no justice in this world. I'm told you can find it in the next. I do not care that much about justice to be in a hurry to find out.

If you want to be compensated for risks YOU ASSUME buy insurance. If you can afford it. And if your state will let you.

[EricF]

They cannot. Neither can they fix the man's broken neck. Why should we live our lives in fear of poor people not being able to pay for our cars or fix our broken necks?

Because we live in a society that makes people responsible for their actions. And because we place value on our cars and necks, and get very angry when someone takes them from us. Unlike MSimon, I am a firm believer in justice. And vengeance

[mad_derek]

Yes, well ... as ChrisMB has pointed out we have compulsory insurance in UK with tow and crush rules for non compliance. I've just looked at one of my policies and the limit for third party damages is £20,000,000 (and I do mean 20 million pounds) for a premium of £249.75 per annum - oh and my car is covered whatever happens (I'll leave you guys to do the currency conversions - if I do it it'll be wrong in five minutes).

20 million pounds? What the heck are you driving, a tractor trailer?

Well, no, actually that's for a medium sized Ford saloon (a Mondeo for the Europeans). You can kill quite lot of people in one strike and at about £M1.5 each (which seems average in UK at moment) or even worse if you only injure them that mounts up quite quickly...

[Diogenes]

For thousands of years, the highest King and the poorest peasant could travel up and down the public roads with their fine horses or their broken down oxcarts.

Except if one horse cart hit another, you weren't risking becoming an organ donor. You'd have to get out and taunt the horse into kicking you in the head.

As I mentioned earlier, My mother was ran over by a horse drawn wagon and nearly died. She underwent several operations. People have been killed by horses and wagons.

Also, minimum insurance standards, at least in the states I'm familiar with, are primarily concerned with liability coverage, medical expenses, then property damage. So, if you only have minimum coverage, and you're hit by an uninsured driver, you're screwed. Assuming you still have your head on, of course, since that seems to be at issue.

If you are hit by Warren Buffet, and he has millions of dollars of insurance, it won't help you a bit if your neck is broken.

It's a right to use the public ways. It is an old and ancient right that no one can be denied the use of public roads.

Ride a bike. Walk. Ride a horse, even (which you can do in most places and on most roads, check your local laws). I believe the only right being infringed upon, technically, is the right to drive the car - not the use of the roads.

Let them eat cake.

[Diogenes]

What is your life worth? Can you be compensated for your life with money? Were you to lose your head in a car crash, would it make any difference to you whether the accident was your fault or the other guy's?

My life is worth about 2.14 million.

I will probably average out making around 150K a year considering my age, career path and prior performance. At a relativly conservative investment of 7% then my life income will likely be around 2.14 Mill in todays dollars.

Now the other argument could be...my life is worth ZERO. Since a human being can not be owned, then the human being has no intrinsic value.

Now, I am christian, and while I am not eager to meet my maker face-to-face, I don't dread being dead. I know a better existence is in store for me. Therefore, being killed is not a tragedy, other than the cost of my lost income....


Therefore, insurance DOES compensate for my life. The act of being alive is worth nothing. Your lost income has a calculatable dollar value and being dead is not actually a tragedy...

I carry life insurance at the 2 Mill level and my wife and lawyer know to extract every dollar out of the person who killed me!

Unless it is a deer who darted out in front of you...
Or a poor person.

But God help the moderately well to do person who might accidentally kill you !

[MSimon]

They cannot. Neither can they fix the man's broken neck. Why should we live our lives in fear of poor people not being able to pay for our cars or fix our broken necks?

Because we live in a society that makes people responsible for their actions. And because we place value on our cars and necks, and get very angry when someone takes them from us. Unlike MSimon, I am a firm believer in justice. And vengeance
:D

We have the Mafia for that. They will give you vengeance for a price.

Of course a society based on that does not advance very far or fast. Because one injustice often leads to another. Blood feuds they are called. Jews did away with that through tort law quite some time ago. But even tort law has its limits. As does justice. But tort law is more civilized. I personally like civilization. So I am willing to forgive the trespasses of others. As so many of mine have been forgiven. You know - the old time religion. If it was good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me.

[EricF]

They cannot. Neither can they fix the man's broken neck. Why should we live our lives in fear of poor people not being able to pay for our cars or fix our broken necks?

Because we live in a society that makes people responsible for their actions. And because we place value on our cars and necks, and get very angry when someone takes them from us. Unlike MSimon, I am a firm believer in justice. And vengeance

We have the Mafia for that. They will give you vengeance for a price.

Of course a society based on that does not advance very far or fast. Because one injustice often leads to another. Blood feuds they are called. Jews did away with that through tort law quite some time ago. But even tort law has its limits. As does justice. But tort law is more civilized. I personally like civilization. So I am willing to forgive the trespasses of others. As so many of mine have been forgiven. You know - the old time religion. If it was good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me.

Yep. Much more civilized to make everyone have liability insurance in case they inadvertantly cause more damage to someones property than they can afford

[Diogenes]

This is a complete and utter strawman. Yes you can be compensated for your life with money; it is paid to your beneficiaries or next of kin. But they are not requiring people buy life insurance, they are requiring liability insurance for property and bodily injury losses.

And those services are both easily valued, and are frequently expensive. So if a poor person were involved in a loss (and they are, every day. I handle them.) how would you expect them to compensate the person whose property they damaged, if they already don't have any money?

Well then. It is a risk. The alternative is to put the poor who are unable to work due to transportation limits on the dole. Fair enough.

Of course you can for a small premium insure against accidents with an uninsured motorist.

Drive carefully, keep both hands on the wheel, and your eyes on the road. The life you save may be your own.

And you know insurance gives rise to moral hazard. - Why be so careful? I'm insured.

I'm not sure we should go putting people on the dole because they have no insurance. If they are so poor they cannot afford basic liability coverage, chances are that owning and insuring an automobile is the least of their worries.

One caveat though: Not all states offed uninsured motorist coverage, either for bodily injury, property, or both. Some of them don't offer underinsured motorist coverage either. (the policies, and hence coverages insurance companies can sell is dictated by that state's respective Dept to Insurance). For example, where I live in AL, we have uninsured motorist bodily injury coverage, but not uninsured motorist property damage coverage.

It could be worse though, I could live in Michigan which is a true no-fault state: if someone hits your vehicle, the only thing you can claim against their insurance is a $500 mini-tort (and then only if you have a deductible or no insurance. You can have broad-form collision coverage which waives any deductible if you are less then 50% at fault). So if you don't carry collision coverage and are not at fault and have a lot of damage, your basically SOL.

The entire auto insurance industry is a mess, but I think requiring basic liability insurance in order to drive is one of the good laws.

It will save your car, but not your neck.

It has the added unintended consequence of violating an ancient right and making other peoples lives even more miserable than before! It just goes to show, we all favor bits of slavery, provided we are not being the slave.