Comments on: Governor: Make Currently Required PIP Auto Insurance Optional

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 03:47:36 +0000

Okay by me. If you are going to assume laws will not be obeyed, why bother to write any law?

Either enforce a law or don’t write that law.

David thinking punishment is tied to crime
or retreat altogether

By: eab

eab — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 02:41:05 +0000

David said…”They’re assuming law abiding people, of course.”

That’s kind of a shaky assumption. After I made my post, I started looking about. The Insurance Research Council is cited in a number of publications over the last couple of years for research that says approximately 24% of Florida drivers are uninsured.

Of course these folks (the IRC) seem to be an industry mouthpiece (based on my admittedly skimpy research),so who knows what their agenda may be with this particular set of figures.

Still, if these estimates are in the ballpark, the folks around here have a lot more faith that the cars we encounter on the roads are being driven by “law abiding people” than may seem justified.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 17:21:11 +0000

They’re assuming law abiding people, of course.

By: eab

eab — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 05:09:11 +0000

Gotta say, I’m kind of amazed at the number of folks who think people without car insurance have a choice between driving or purchasing some. I suspect lots of people are driving without it.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:17:06 +0000

REGARDING:
“- – - we may have to stop treating folks without coverage at our hospitals and emergency rooms. – - Wonder if that would change the debate? Would it save a lot of money?”"

Of course it would save money. It’s far cheaper to die at the start than to be treated many times and still die at the end of your life. People don’t want to do it because it would include letting little children suffer for the short-comings of their parents.

They claim it would be cheaper to force everybody to pay for health insurance and still have the government buy insurance for the poorest. I think even the ones who oppose haven’t questioned if that is true or not, because government people never lie.

Most of the dispute centers around whether the federal government has the power to require it. Many don’t care if federal government has power under the Constitution as long as whatever they are proposing is considered a good thing.

They seldom consider the dangers of unlimited federal power in the wrong hands.

David wondering at life
under President Rick Scott
if he had unlimited power

By: eab

eab — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 16:35:42 +0000

Since people without insurance (health or auto) are effectively financed by those who do carry it, we may have to stop treating folks without coverage at our hospitals and emergency rooms.

Wonder if that would change the debate? Would it save a lot of money?

By: JIM W

JIM W — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 22:10:40 +0000

Once again the big bad insurance companies are out to get everyone. Yeah right get your head out of the sand. You have a right to not drive but you do not have the right to drive without insurance! If it was not required everyone would not have it. So how would you feel if you knew most of the people around you did not have it and you did. Knowing at some point in time your going to have an accident? Is it fair for your insurance that you paid premiums to to have to take care of you and the person who did not have insurance? Think not!
Call it what you want but PIP and any other auto coverage is usually a good idea. Especially if you have aquired any assets at all. In fact if you have assets you need an umbrella coverage so you do not loose what you have by exceeding you normal coverage of your policy. It’s not hard to blow out a million dollars today if someone is critically injured. Remember if your at fault and are found guilty or ticketed for it your responsible for it financialy. Just saying you might want to think about what your saying getting insurance after the fact would be like the tin man with Danny Divito who said I don’t need insurance and then on his way into the emergency roon with a heart attack was asking if he bought the insurance or where was the guy trying to sell t to him because he now wanted it. Too little to late!

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 23:53:40 +0000

regarding:
“WHY WOULD IT BE SOCIALISM ”

tom, huh was being sarcastic. People have said “Obamacare” is socialism because it isn’t optional. huh compares the two rather than contrasting the differences between opting to drive and opting to breathe.

huh wants both forms of insurance required.

David explaining

By: tom

tom — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 21:58:09 +0000

WHY WOULD IT BE SOCIALISM FOR PEOPLE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE DAMAGE THEY DO WHILE DRIVING A CAR? DRIVING IS A PRIVILEGE NOT A RIGHT.

By: molino jim

molino jim — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 18:30:56 +0000

Poor insurance companies. I know of a young lady who was in an accident and had to have knee surgery. She was not at fault. She was unable to work for several months as an EMT because of the damage to her knee.The other driver did not have insurance due to his license being revoked—but that didn’t stop him from driving. With out PIP she would have had large medical bills plus day to day bills. As you can guess the other driver has nothing to sue for, so she had all of the bills. Scott will be a one term governor if we are lucky. He’s talking up all sorts of NEW JOBS but they never happen. Closing state prisons, unemployment offices ( you now have to file on line—tough luck if don’t have internet service) and cutting funding to any thing and every thing.