And the best part is it's mandatory!
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2025
887 points (97.2% liked)
People Twitter
8352 readers
2085 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Gotta pay the capitalism toll.
Well, only the liability part and that sorta makes sense
So the person who hit you and totaled your car can hire a lawyer and sue the shit out of you, which your insurance will settle out of court for an undisclosed sum, and they get to walk away with the money, you get Jack shit, and to top it all off, you don't even have a fucking car anymore.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of insurance when it comes to 1000+ lbs death machines that go barreling down the road at speeds faster than the fastest land animals as part of normal usage, while packing more kinetic energy than a high caliber bullet.
.... It's just... Those laws aren't there for you, they're there to protect the rich. After all, you might hit their Porsche with your Honda, and they don't want to pay for that.
If mandatory liability insurance existed for the sake of Porsches, the madatory maximum would be enough to cover a Porche. Then they wouldnt have to go to the trouble of suing you.
I mean if they hit you, then their insurance pays. Maybe it's different on your continent though.
If someone with money hits you, your vehicle, or even your life, has a value that is predetermined by the insurance companies by whatever policy you get.
The middle and upper class can afford comprehensive insurance so if they are found at fault for hitting you then they still get a payout.
If you hit them, they get a payout.
If you're poor and can only afford liability insurance, your best hope is that someone is found to be at fault for hitting you, and you get a payout. If you hit someone else, you get jack shit, and they get a payout.
The fact is, they are unlikely to be found at fault, since the rich and powerful have long since paid off the cops who write the incident reports. So if they're at fault, then the record says nobody is at fault. But if they can spin it so that you're at fault, then you're at fault.
Honestly, it's the main reason I own a two channel dashcam. I don't want to get fucked by some rich asshole, who lied to the police to make a collision seem like I'm at fault. If I'm genuinely at fault, then fuck me I guess. I can accept that I fucked up.
I try to look at this shit from all angles, and all I ever see is that the ones that always win, is the insurance companies. 10 out of 10 times, and the rich bastards with the best insurance policies come in second place. The rest of us are a distant third, we stand to lose the most and gain the least, even if things are in our favor.
The dash cam is a great idea always.
Anyway, my original point was that nobody is forcing you to insure yourself, only the danger you can pose to other people on the road. Because people seemed salty that insurance is mandatory. And at least where I come from, liability insurance is very cheap compared to full coverage.
What op is describing is called "self insured"
Also called "illegal" in most places.
And the flying is, it was much cheaper when it wasn't mandatory. Liability insurance used to be super cheap because people didn't want to pay for insurance that didn't cover their own car. But when states started mandating liability insurance the price skyrocketed.
What grinds my gears though is being required to have liability insurance for every car even though the car itself isn't covered. I'd love to daily drive a super-efficient electric car, but I teach scuba on the side and once or twice a week end up having to haul a bunch of dive gear in my cargo van. But with the cost of liability insurance, I can't afford to keep my van as a beater weekend driver when the time comes to get a new daily driver, so I'll have to buy another fuel-guzzling murder machine that I mostly drive to an office job downtown.
its a MLM, just like health insurance. theres no guaranteed they will cover your cost in damages some of the time.
Funny enough, if somebody offers you insurance that builds cash value, even though the sound of it does make sense you should probably run.
I've never heard of this. Why should I run?
The price of insurance only covers the statistically predicted amount of payoffs to all people insured plus a profit. If you're building a cash value, then that's priced in, with more profit priced in for them on the equity youve built. You're better off pocketing the difference.
Right, I would assume it’s an investment vehicle with the extra margin built in. This is why insurance should only be in the largest pools with no profit interference and only the lowest administrative overhead possible.
Any guesses as to how much money would be in the pool if every person in your country paid into a single pool for automotive insurance? I bet that if such a pool existed, then there would be a lot of motivation to use that money to reduce the risk of paying out. Which makes me wonder if public transit is better in countries with national health insurance as a result of the national health insurance.
In BC, Canada, auto insurance is managed by the government. We have low insurance rates to begin with, and then we get a cheque in the mail at the end of the year if they collect more premiums than they pay out. (It's not a straight annual thing, of course. I don't know the details, but over the longer term it's how it works.)
It's kinda weird not having any sales pressure, too. They aren't at all light about upselling extra features. I only just found out that for ~$30/yr, I can add replacement car coverage to my plan. Over a lifetime, that's like $2K to never need to worry about a collision leaving you unable to drive for more than like a day to get a rental.
Didn't always have cheap insurance. The government before this one looted that extra auto insurance pool money to put into the general coffers so that they could claim the budget was in the black instead of the red, rather than send it back to people, and they charged like 50-100% more for insurance to begin with.
German here, the answer is no. Our public transit is crumbling left and right. Our health insurance too though. Serves us right for voting conservatives into power again and again for the last 30 years.
I have to imagine the tail wags the dog both ways in that scenario. Better public transport feeds into better public health outcomes, and nationalised healthcare (should) have a vested interest in reducing auto reliance for myriad reasons.
view more: next ›