Simple question about car insurance

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by DeathStar, Feb 23, 2012.

  1. JohnnyMo

    JohnnyMo Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2011
    Messages:
    14,715
    Likes Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's the law, and you know it.

    What a stupid thread
     
  2. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lemme ask you this: if someone arsons your house, will they necessarily be able to pay for it? Of course not.

    Should you be allowed to legally FORCE everyone in your state/nation, to buy "Insurance X", to make sure that if someone does arson your house, the damages will be covered?

    That is equal, analytically, to car insurance.
     
  3. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What an idiotic comment. It's the law that you can't smoke marijuana. Do you think we should be forced to not peacefully do as we please, simply because it's "the law"?

    You have NO RIGHT to make it legal to violate my rights, in my humble (*)(*)(*)(*)ing opinion.
     
  4. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The entire authoritarian argument on this thread is that security over essential freedom is somehow necessary for this specific situation, and that majority rule is something to be respected.

    How moronic.
     
  5. JohnnyMo

    JohnnyMo Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2011
    Messages:
    14,715
    Likes Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's also the law that we can't murder, steal, speed run read lights, etc etc etc.

    Stupid thread, really, really stupid! JMHO
     
  6. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What does that have to do with my point? Seriously?

    I think since there's a chance you might blunder into me and make me trip and sprain my ankle on the sidewalk someday, I should be allowed to charge you 100 bucks a day in the form of "Insurance X" just so any health or other damages are covered in case you do so.

    If you can fine me for car damages that I never caused, I can fine you for that.
     
  7. JohnnyMo

    JohnnyMo Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2011
    Messages:
    14,715
    Likes Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Done wasting my time. Seems like 99% of the membership sees this as I do.

    Have a great day
     
  8. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You don't have the intelligence nor dignity, apparently, to even understand my should-be OBVIOUS point. You just want to fine me and punish me for things I never did.
     
  9. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You tried this before, and - like a zombie - you continue to trudge forward right through my repudiation of the comment. Let's see if you do it again.

    Arson requires a conscious criminal act. It is - by definition - illegal. There is no protected behaviour wrt to undertaking arson, therefore it is not analogous to driving, which is a protected behaviour (read: a licensed privilege).

    There is no action associated with arson that puts someone's house at risk as a result of engaging in it. The closest I could come to offering one wouldn't fit the description of arson, but I'll offer it anyway.

    If you contract a plumber or electrician to do work in your home, your home is exposed to a risk of fire as a consequence of that work. Such a fire would - necessarily - be the result of an unfortunate accident.

    Like the driver, both the plumber and electrician are required to carry insurance to protect both themselves and your property from damage.

    That better make sense to you, or you will be in serious jeopardy of being put on my ignore list.

    My rewrite of your attempt at an analogy is analogous. Yours was not.
     
  10. hoytmonger

    hoytmonger New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All insurance produces a "moral hazard," which means people tend to behave more recklessly when the responsibility for their actions is removed. People without insurance tend to take risk more seriously.
     
  11. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Holy (*)(*)(*)(*), SOMEONE GETS IT! FINALLY!!

    That was my whole point with "the state encourages more risk" etc.
     
  12. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Forced insurance is forced insurance is forced insurance. What do you not understand about the example of where the state charges people with "Insurance X" for walking outside their own dwellings? Walking anywhere other than your property is a privilege, right? Should I be allowed to, through politics, force you to pay 100 bucks per month on "Insurance X" that way in case you bump into me on the sidewalk and I fall, perhaps onto the road onto incoming traffic, Insurance X can pay for it?

    Forced insurance is only superficially non-evil.
     
  13. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's really a moot observation, as even "taking risk more seriously" doesn't remove it.
     
  14. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are not forced to buy insurance - unless Obama has his way wrt Obamacare.

    You have a choice. The choice you make determines if you choose to obligate yourself to buy insurance.

    Other than that, you keep trying the same arguments I've already defeated.
     
  15. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    Your neighbors aren't forcing you to buy car insurance, they're simply making it a requirement to use their property. Cooperating with others requires you to find away to resolve differences of opinion, if you are unable to find away to resolve those differences you should abstain from cooperative ventures (like streets).
     
  16. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    uhh if I'm gonna drive anywhere then yes I'm forced to buy car insurance.

    Do you think you should also force me to buy health insurance, or since you'll yet again dodge the following question by arguing semantics, we'll call it "Insurance Y", to pay for your bodily and emotional damages, which can also easily happen in a car wreck?
     
  17. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    yeah. I wanna be the owner of a "walking insurance" company and get rich off of that someday. I'll be sure to charge you 100 bucks a day, or whatever I want, for you to be allowed to walk or otherwise take your physical body anywhere other than your house. Just in case you bump into someone and make them trip and sprain their ankle, or break a bone, or fall into oncoming traffic and cause a crash pile-up.
     
  18. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    Good luck with that. When you find you can't get what you want but auto insurance still exists, you might want to consider why your neighbors would support one and not the other. Recognizing that difference could help you find your way back to the real world.
     
  19. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They'd accept one and not the other because one has been forced on us so long that we accept it.

    But that doesn't matter. You have NO RIGHT to limit my freedom to that extent without my consent.
     
  20. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    filler post
     
  21. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes. Taking risk more seriously doesn't remove the risk. Therefore we should have a greedy thieving police state rob us in return for the illusion of security.

    (*)(*)(*)(*)ING BRILLIANT!!!!
     
  22. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    I don't. The folks who own the road do.
     
  23. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The tyrannical Big Police State owns the roads. I don't like that.
     
  24. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63


    No they don't. They just work for the taxpayer.
     
  25. DeathStar

    DeathStar Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,429
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you call yourself a "conservative" (i.e. minimal government-intervening supporter)? If so, you're lying.
     

Share This Page