when does it become your business?

[Apoc]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Because if it's the other person's fault it typically costs you nothing but if that other driver is uninsured, then in most places you end up having to pay your deductible.

So, my bike gets wrecked (I have replacement value ins.), it costs me 500$ for a brand new one when its two years old? If im not seriously injured, then bonus.

I guess I have a different outlook on these things than most. I've got my own problems to deal with most days, so I dont feel the need to concern myself with the actions of others who could be in far worst financial shape than I am. I know poor people. I grew up and live in a poor community. And I know sometimes people struggle to get by, and that no insurance can be a product of circumstance, of people struggling to get by, and that 200$/month is the difference between groceries and insurance, because the industry (forestry) that they've depended on for years is no longer profitable. They still need a vehicle.

I know how lucky I am to make 80k/year (with overtime) as a single man, and understand how someone making 15k/year could maybe not afford insurance when they have a family to look after.

[Papa_Complex]

I grew up poor too. We still abided by the law. There are far too many people around who either have money for a nice car/bike OR insurance. Buy a beater and play it legal.

[the chi]

The poor folks are the ones who need it more than those who have the money to pay the medical or replacement costs if something happens.

Heres a hypothetical: A person makes 15K a year, they dont get insurance because its too expensive and they have to "take care of their family". Are they responsibly taking care of their family if they arent providing insurance in the case of an emergency?

[z06boy]

Originally Posted by The Chi

The poor folks are the ones who need it more than those who have the money to pay the medical or replacement costs if something happens.

Heres a hypothetical: A person makes 15K a year, they dont get insurance because its too expensive and they have to "take care of their family". Are they responsibly taking care of their family if they arent providing insurance in the case of an emergency?

No not really because what if they get hit by someone with no insurance ?

Of course the flip side is that they may be doing all that they can at the moment and just flat out can't afford it and have to have a car to get to work...doctors...blah..blah.

They "shouldn't" be having kids imho but of course things happen.

I guess they could depend on state run hospitals...which opens up another whole topic to argue.

Tough situaton for sure.

[the chi]

Originally Posted by z06boy

No not really because what if they get hit by someone with no insurance ?

Of course the flip side is that they may be doing all that they can at the moment and just flat out can't afford it and have to have a car to get to work...doctors...blah..blah.

They "shouldn't" be having kids imho but of course things happen.

I guess they could depend on state run hospitals...which opens up another whole topic to argue.

Tough situaton for sure.

Of course theres always other ingredients to the situation, I was avoiding them for simplicity.

Like - if they can afford a car but no insurance, why not take public transportation, then it can lead to -what if there is no transportation available...should they walk? THEN- if they are walking to and from work, with no car to pay insurance, how do they get around in the event of an emergency - theyd need to get to their family fast, cant do that walking, insurance may not provide for ambulance...etc etc etc...

[z06boy]

Originally Posted by The Chi

Of course theres always other ingredients to the situation, I was avoiding them for simplicity.

Like - if they can afford a car but no insurance, why not take public transportation, then it can lead to -what if there is no transportation available...should they walk? THEN- if they are walking to and from work, with no car to pay insurance, how do they get around in the event of an emergency - theyd need to get to their family fast, cant do that walking, insurance may not provide for ambulance...etc etc etc...

You are correct.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by z06boy

No not really because what if they get hit by someone with no insurance ?

Of course the flip side is that they may be doing all that they can at the moment and just flat out can't afford it and have to have a car to get to work...doctors...blah..blah.

They "shouldn't" be having kids imho but of course things happen.

I guess they could depend on state run hospitals...which opens up another whole topic to argue.

Tough situaton for sure.

They have a "right" to have kids. They have a "responsibility" to insure a vehicle, if they're using it on public roads. It's amazing how many people scream about getting their rights, who also conveniently forget about their responsibilities.

[HurricaneHeather]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

They have a "right" to have kids. They have a "responsibility" to insure a vehicle, if they're using it on public roads. It's amazing how many people scream about getting their rights, who also conveniently forget about their responsibilities.

[Tmall]

A responsible person would phone the police if they knew somebody was breaking the law. Right?

[z06boy]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

They have a "right" to have kids. They have a "responsibility" to insure a vehicle, if they're using it on public roads. It's amazing how many people scream about getting their rights, who also conveniently forget about their responsibilities.

Agree 100 %

I'm the opposite...no kids and we have full coverage on everything.