Author Topic: raider179 was right... (Read 7960 times)

Jackal1 · « **Reply #90 on:** September 20, 2005, 05:51:10 PM »

The insurance debate is ridiculous. By reading some of the comments here you would think that insurance companies collect your premiums and place them in a cigar box for safe keeping, never to be used unless there is a loss on your behalf.
Actualy your premiums are invested on high return investments. They don`t gather dust waiting on disaster to strike.
And also insurance companies purchase...guess what? Insurance.

beet1e · « **Reply #91 on:** September 20, 2005, 06:06:46 PM »

Still doesn't alter the fact that payouts are considerably higher when seatbelts are not worn, as they weren't when there was no law to enforce it. As I have already pointed out, the road death toll here was cut by about 40% or 2000 per annum. That's a lot of life assurance policy payouts.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #92 on:** September 20, 2005, 06:29:08 PM »

I`m sure the insurance companies of the world are very touched at your concern for their well being and willingness to buy into any load dished out.
Their payouts has absolutely no effect on you or me other than to be used as excuse to raise premiums.. It`s a scam. One that seems to be working great.

Toad · « **Reply #93 on:** September 20, 2005, 06:32:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sixpence
Who is to say they wouldn't be higher?

Careful, those hooks sting when they exit by the aft stairs.

Your rates will NEVER go down. Real simple; those are the insurance companies' profits. They are not voluntarily going to reduce rates because it cuts profits.

Instead, to make Wall Street happy, each year they will find another hoop for you to jump through, another way to raise rates.

You nannies could have everyone driving around in a Volkswagen Passat GLX (V6) (rated #1 in class for safety), mandatory nomex driving suit, six point harness and helmet with governors to limit speed to 25 mph and your rates STILL wouldn't go down.

It's PROFITS.

But even then folks like you would look at each other with those knowing nanny eyes and say.."but the rates could have gone up".

Sixpence · « **Reply #94 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:02:50 PM »

Ok, so you say it doesn't cost us money, I say it does

vorticon · « **Reply #95 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:07:46 PM »

until they wire cars so you cant even start them unless the seatbelt is buckled, or its a automatic death penalty for not wearing one, you still have a choice...your just going to have to pay a small fine every now and again...

bet if we dropped the law right now, the number of seatbelt wearers wouldnt drop, weve already made it a automatic movement upon entering a car for everyone thats going to do it anyway...

Toad · « **Reply #96 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:09:18 PM »

Well, since you're so concerned about money, why don't you address a real problem?

From NHTSA:

Quote

In 2003, 30 percent of all fatal crashes during the week were alcohol-related, compared to 53 percent on weekends. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate was 5 percent during the week and 12 percent during the weekend.

If you think seatbelts drive up your rates (and you are wrong; desire for more corporate profit drives up your rates), I have to guess that the drunk driving states give you a hissy fit about rates.

What's your solution? What nanny-state magic fix do you propose?

The can be NO DOUBT alcohol is a much more serious problem than seatbelt usage.

Sixpence · « **Reply #97 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:15:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Well, since you're so concerned about money, why don't you address a real problem?

From NHTSA:

If you think seatbelts drive up your rates (and you are wrong; desire for more corporate profit drives up your rates), I have to guess that the drunk driving states give you a hissy fit about rates.

What's your solution? What nanny-state magic fix do you propose?

The can be NO DOUBT alcohol is a much more serious problem than seatbelt usage.

Already tried, prohibition didn't work, and if seat belts don't work, the same will happen

Toad · « **Reply #98 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:17:27 PM »

LOL!

So you won't even TRY to address a more serious "insurance rates" problem?

The people that are REALLY a threat to you on the road AND in rising insurance rates are drunk drivers.

Scared to take that one on eh?

Hangtime · « **Reply #99 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:32:38 PM »

PC fingers twitch on PC triggers.

...forgot to take the PC saftey off.

Toad, most folks when requested to think and apply simple logic come up with the damndest responses when they hit the PC barrier.

Nice Pavlov demonstration, though!

Sixpence · « **Reply #100 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:45:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
LOL!

So you won't even TRY to address a more serious "insurance rates" problem?

The people that are REALLY a threat to you on the road AND in rising insurance rates are drunk drivers.

Scared to take that one on eh?

lol, you are making my point, it is illegal to drink and drive. If you get caught it is a stiff fine and repeated offenses will put you behind bars, as it should. And I suppose there is no proof that the law has not reduced drinking and driving? I guess that is taking away your right to choose to drink and drive, huh? A true blow for freedom

Wearing a seat belt does not deny you the freedom to drive. You can't walk down the street naked, you have to wear clothes in public, I guess your right to choose has been taken away eh? Another blow for freedom, start the revolution

Nash · « **Reply #101 on:** September 20, 2005, 09:50:17 PM »

That's the way it has always been explained to me. Less injuries = less premiums. And it's not just cars. Bike helmets (for eg.) = less of a drain on health care costs.

So is that BS? I've never considered that, because it made sense to me.

But maybe a paralell can be drawn with taxation. One thing I know about new taxes, fees, or whatever... is that they never go away. Once the initial reason for the tax is satiated, there will always be something new to fill the void and require the continuance of that tax.

Back to insurance companies. Less injuries means less payouts. We know their motives. So the question is (and is being asked here already):

Do the insurance companies just soak up the profits from less payouts, or do the rates fairly reflect our taking measures to protect ourselves?

I guess at this point, really, we're gonna need numbers.

Toad · « **Reply #102 on:** September 20, 2005, 10:15:18 PM »

Drunk drivers are putting your rates in the stratosphere.

The DD rates and trends don't change; they only go up.

What's your solution nanny?

Sixpence · « **Reply #103 on:** September 20, 2005, 10:17:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Drunk drivers are putting your rates in the stratosphere.

The DD rates and trends don't change; they only go up.

What's your solution nanny?

I support drunk driving laws, like I support the seat belt law

The name calling Toad, cmon

Toad · « **Reply #104 on:** September 20, 2005, 10:19:06 PM »

If the apron fits, wear it.