this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2025
887 points (97.2% liked)

People Twitter

8357 readers
1636 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 126 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I used to be with a mutual insurance, which was still actually a mutual insurance, meaning the customers were also the shareholders. I got a small dividend most years out of whatever surplus existed.

[–] shplane@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago

Wish we could have that for fire insurance in California but the company would go belly up by the end of the month.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 125 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

How insurance should work: Disasters are unpredictable, are bound to happen and can be very expensive to resolve. So instead of each individual risking bankruptcy for participating in a system, everybody pools together money at a much lower individual cost. That money goes toward a statistical guarantee that the cost of any disaster will be covered.

How insurance actually works (under capitalism): For-profit companies use every tool at their disposal, regardless of ethics or legality, in order to take as much of your money as they can possibly get away with while simultaneously paying out as little as they can possibly get away with, and then pocket the difference.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 52 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Why people think first part is great for insurance, but when somebody wants to scale that up its suddenly horrible socialism.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 week ago (6 children)

The province I'm in has socialized car insurance through a crown corporation. We all pay relatively the same rate, and there are discount tiers applied based on years of experience. If they have a good year of low payouts we get rebate cheques because its not a profit corp.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Hupf@feddit.org 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

everybody pools together money at a much lower individual cost

Another example of this is would be public transport.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 80 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The idea is when everyone pays into insurance the collective fund is used to pay for the costs any individual wouldn’t.

Thankfully accidents or thefts don’t happen to everyone, but if they do you usually get more out than you put in (personal liability is usually millions of dollars, nobody puts that much in individually).

Where this goes wrong is when fraud happens or insurance companies are incentivized to manipulate rates to increase their profits.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 52 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Where this goes wrong is when fraud happens or insurance companies are incentivized to manipulate rates to increase their profits.

I'd say the problem is that insurance companies can take profits above operating expenses at all. These should all be strictly regulated (if not entirely state-run) and predicated on funds going to reimbursements for expenses + minimal admin overhead. If money is leaking out the window to shareholders via dividends and stock buybacks, its effectively being embezzled from policy holders.

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago (3 children)

There's an argument for maintaining a reserve (think about disaster prone areas for things like floods, hurricanes, etc...), but I agree that it would be better for insurance organizations to be prohibited from being publicly traded (private or public benefit corporation only)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Where's the disincentivization for manipulation?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ExtremeDullard@piefed.social 72 points 1 week ago

I have to wait to get hit???

I'm guessing she hasn't figured out the concept of insurance fraud...

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (24 children)

And if you don't pay it you can't legally drive a car. And if you can't drive a car, you aren't going to be hired for a job.

I repeat, YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO GIVE A CORPORATION MONEY IN RETURN FOR NOTHING IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN SOCIETY

Car insurance is a fucking scam.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago

Need a new paint job? Get in an accident. Check engine light? Get in an accident.

I am not a ~~lawyer~~ person whose advice should be listened to on anything, ever.

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (4 children)

What op is describing is called "self insured"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] winkledinkle@sh.itjust.works 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Liability insurance: legally required.

Also liability insurance: costs hundreds and the price gets jacked up every few months because fuck you.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] jared@mander.xyz 30 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Insurance has its place. How much it costs, how much they fight to help you when it comes time, those are the problems.

[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The fact that for-investor-profit insurance companies exist are the problems.

[–] Darkard@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The fact it's run for profit AND is a mandatory requirement to having a car.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LavaPlanet@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 week ago

If it were a socialist systemic thing, and we rephrased it to, we all contribute a little each year and it goes into a pot for anyone who needs their car fixed, who contributes? (but then you gotta erase the evil corporation that rakes in billions and pays ceos unimaginable money)

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

This already exists, and they are called unit linked insurance plans. Basically the insurance company provides you some units in an investment/trust fund, in addition to the policy benefit, for your premiums (obviously higher to compensate).

They are actually much scammier, because the insurance company administers the unit fund as well, and the fees are often much higher than if you just buy the policy and an exchange traded trust/fund separately. They were formulated by insurance companies basically for the sole purpose of bamboozling people who echo this meme. Back in the day, door to door insurance salespeople would say "even if you never claim, you still get a payout!".

Unit-linked insurance plan - Wikipedia - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit-linked_insurance_plan

[–] peetabix@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Its like gambling, I bet 100 bucks something will happen to my car this month. Damn nothing happened, lost again.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (7 children)

And the best part is it's mandatory!

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] metoosalem@feddit.org 22 points 1 week ago

Once you start seeing insurances as casinos where you can bet on something happening to you or not it makes a little more sense

[–] chilldrivenspade@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

bc “businessmen” in america think they are providing something of value and not utter bullshit

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago
  • Léon: Tony... All the money I make, that you keep for me...
  • Tony: You need some money?
  • Léon: No, just curious... Because, I've been working a long time... And I havent done anything with my... I thought maybe someday I could
  • [uncomfortable]
  • Léon: use it.
  • Tony: [Figuring him out] You met a woman.
[–] Zink@programming.dev 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Funny enough, if somebody offers you insurance that builds cash value, even though the sound of it does make sense you should probably run.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 19 points 1 week ago

its a MLM, just like health insurance. theres no guaranteed they will cover your cost in damages some of the time.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Homeowner's insurance is worse, almost as bad as health insurance. Try getting them to pay out, and if they do, watch your rates go up, or your policy get cancelled. If you have a mortgage, you must have homeowner's insurance. State Farm cancelled me out of the blue after 25 years without a single claim.

I suspect they all conspire to cancel policies, knowing that we need to go somewhere, so State Farm cancels a customer, and they go to Allstate at a much higher rate, and Allstate cancels a different customer, and they go to State Farm at a much higher rate. This forces the customer to go through a new approval process, and sign a new contract that is probably worse for them than they had before, in addition to being a higher rate.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's basically what whole life insurance is, and it's a complete scam IMO because premiums are high (to allow for investment) and the investment is too conservative. You're much better off buying term life insurance and investing the difference.

You can partly do this DIY with self insurance. Basically, you put a certain amount of capital into a bank account or something and hand that over to the state treasurer in a trust, and it needs to be about $200-400k in my area (range is because the law isn't clear to me). If you can stand to part with that much, you probably prefer to have the insurance take that risk for you so you can retain control over that money and not worry about lawsuits.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago

Insurance is valid, profit from insurance is where it gets problematic cause the whole point of insurance is to have a similar average outcome, just less extremes in the worse case scenario.

load more comments
view more: next ›