tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post115514281251145032..comments2024-01-16T11:09:39.454-06:00Comments on Do One Thing Better: Could government do it better: Car insuranceUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155315812938500032006-08-11T12:03:00.000-05:002006-08-11T12:03:00.000-05:00Personally, I really like the idea! As the esteeme...Personally, I really like the idea! As the esteemed Mr. Woods pointed out, it's mandated I have insurance, why shouldn't it be made accessible to me through the state? <BR/><BR/>Of course, I feel that way about all insurance. If they make me buy insurance by law, they should make it a law that someone cover me for a reasonable price. Personally, I think that if they say I have to by insurance BY Chris the Hippiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18434819898396611160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155217569317900922006-08-10T08:46:00.000-05:002006-08-10T08:46:00.000-05:00Car insurance is a bit too much government involve...Car insurance is a bit too much government involvement for my taste. R's would love stuff like that as their campaign fodder. I certainly don't see it as any kind of high priority. Let's focus on the important stuff = health care. Even there, I don't really care how we achieve some sort of universal coverage. Maybe government is not the only answer. For example, it will be interesting to Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155153058502887292006-08-09T14:50:00.000-05:002006-08-09T14:50:00.000-05:00As far as licensing cars goes, it's not the case t...As far as licensing cars goes, it's not the case that "every" car is government-known. But that's a side point.<BR/><BR/>There's a critical difference between long-existing government programs (public K12) and new ones (NCLB). New ones are much more likely to be revolve around 1984/militarist "security" culture.<BR/><BR/>So, the government modifies its structure through new programs. In the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155148998937159712006-08-09T13:43:00.000-05:002006-08-09T13:43:00.000-05:00I think the best way to answer that question might...I think the best way to answer that question might be this:<BR/><BR/>Driving is a luxury, health care is not.<BR/><BR/>Driving a car and/or insuring it is a luxury you can opt out of or have revoked if you lack the money, are an unsafe driver, or simply prefer not to partake.<BR/><BR/>As such, if you decide not to have car insurance, you can simply not drive.<BR/><BR/>Health care doesn't have Kyle Lobnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04796327854500626621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155148270563189602006-08-09T13:31:00.000-05:002006-08-09T13:31:00.000-05:00If the Government can mandate people have car insu...If the Government can mandate people have car insurance then why can't they do the same with health insurance?noneed4thneedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00722983760373724246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155148132828999072006-08-09T13:28:00.000-05:002006-08-09T13:28:00.000-05:00Two thoughts:In my ideal world, a state car insura...Two thoughts:<BR/><BR/>In my ideal world, a state car insurance program would be self-funded and self-sustaining, much like the USPS. As such, it wouldn't be generating profit to build bombs that tear children to shreds, or any other kind of bombs.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, I'm not advocating for the state to replace ALL auto insurance. I think allowing private companies to continue to exist would forceKyle Lobnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04796327854500626621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155147647078276512006-08-09T13:20:00.000-05:002006-08-09T13:20:00.000-05:00The profit incentive would be partially, if not to...The profit incentive would be partially, if not totally, replaced by the government's desire to bring in as much money as possible to the general treasury.<BR/><BR/>(Bombs that tear children to shreds are expensive.)<BR/><BR/>The profit motive, and the corner-cutting it entails, would still be there. Except in the case of the government, the "market" would be less flexible because government isAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6196340.post-1155147084940921112006-08-09T13:11:00.000-05:002006-08-09T13:11:00.000-05:00For the simple reason that the state requires auto...For the simple reason that the state requires auto insurance to be able to drive legally without receiving a major fine, I fully support the idea of states offering car insurance. Not everyone can afford decent coverage or costs, so a state provided system provides a larger pool and potentially much lower premuims, just like state-funded healthcare.Chris Woodshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09498919638667819353noreply@blogger.com