No. The protection is for the person you damaged who would be left with nothing if you couldn’t pay. That is why automobile liability insurance is mandatory, not to protect you. That it covers you ass financially is incidental to the requirement to have the insurance.
3 Likes
Which protects me…
That’s for confirming.
Incidental. The “mandatory” part is to protect others.
It’s just like mandatory collision insurance to protect the financer of your car loan or the mandatory fire insurance to protect the holder of your home mortgage. As soon as you pay off the loan, you are no longer required to carry the insurance.
2 Likes
Ita to protect both.
It protects the person responsible for the accident because they won’t go bankrupt paying for the car they hit. And it protects the non responsible because they get their car repaired.
And the more people insured the cheaper it is for us all
This is crazy talk.
No. It’s to protect both.
We don’t need a nation full of people going bankrupt because they caused damage to an expensive vehicle.
Mandatory insurance is the only way to allow Maseratis and Yugos on the same highway.
The point is, it is mandatory to protect others not you. The mandatory provision of the ACA was to help fund the system under the guise of protecting people who may not have needed or wanted protection.
No.
That’s not correct. It’s both.
It’s no good to have millions of people bankrupt just because they hit a car on their way to work.
It’s mandatory because people need to drive to work and it’s bad for the country to have millions going bankrupt as a result.
Have you completely forgotten that the premise of mandatory participation in the ACA was to reduce the cost of insurance for the people who wanted health insurance by forcing people who don’t want it to join in the pool? Mandatory vehicle liability insurance has nothing to do with reducing the cost of insurance policies.
3 Likes
One is a cheap Slavic piece of ■■■■ and the other is an expensive Italian piece of ■■■■■
Repeating it doesn’t make it true.
We are required to have auto insurance both for the person we might hit and for us.
To keep the hit person whole and to keep us out of bankruptcy.
That was one justification yes.
Another justification was, since the public option was too socialist for the moderate democrats, they had to cook up a plan that enriched the insurance companies instead of cutting them out.
This was the best we could pass.
1 Like
Correct. You’re not required to cover your own car. Plenty of people have liability-only car insurance. They’re required to carry liability insurance. They are not required to carry collision or comprehensive.
2 Likes
Give me a ■■■■■■■ break, the Democrat Party today does not in any way resemble the Democrat party of FDR and JFK. Regarding the hatred I’m speaking about is in reference to the lib politicians and lib elites. Have you ever heard of Sean Hannity? He often plays clips of how lib politicians and lib elites feel about conservative Americans. You hear things like deplorables, mega MAGAs, uneducated, racists, white supremacists, etc. Heck we even had one of the most prominent Dem senators practically call for the assignation of two conservative Supreme Court Justices. Most voters on the other hand, whether they vote Dem or Rep are not very political and are largely just living their lives. Regarding where the Dems are philosophically you have the racism of CRT, DEI, the lunacy of LGBTQ+, open borders. Maybe let go of your belief that these lib politicians honestly give two ■■■■■ about us and our families and not a lust for absolute power and to wield that power over everyone with force if necessary.
2 Likes
What party has pretty much refused to compromise for the last decade or so?
The fringe right controls the R Party…to the point many have left the party due to their extreme views. We can argue about this all day long…we will see in November. Trump just might be Goldwater part 2.
Goldwater was an intellectual. Trump is not.
This really shows how uninformed some folks are…Obama governed like a centrist…Hell, he could not even get a public option included in the ACA., as it was not a priority.
What are the extremist positions supported by Republican politicians?
1 Like
Agreed. But they both have/had cult followings. How did he do on '64?
Secure borders, cut taxes, don’t start new wars, keep men out of women’s locker rooms, fund the police, don’t teach CRT to kids…
Real fringe stuff!
2 Likes
