True, you could spend ages 40-70 paying off a house that has all of your life’s work invested in it and then stop insuring it. Assuming you make enough money to not have to refinance it or take a reverse mortgage to pay for your medical bills that started piling up in your late 60s
Apparently someone doesn’t think that happens. But that’s what happens to the people I have known. Medical bills to reverse mortgage… Then sell what’s left of the equity to have assisted living for the last year or so when you’ve gotten to be more than anyone in the family can manage while trying to work and take care of their family/selves. When they die there is usually nothing left.
Vehicle and property insurances are a public good safety measure. If you go and cause serious injury to someone with your vehicle or in your home they have every right to expect to be made whole again. Without that insurance you would personally be liable for those debts. Unless you’re willing to say that those kind of debts are not dischargeable in bankruptcy then insurance to cover them is essential for anyone who doesn’t have a few hundred thousand laying around.
Workers comp is useful much the same way, unless you want that dim employee who cuts their hand off to be the death of your business.
FDIC helps ensure that some fool tanking every asset the bank has won’t leave the depositors holding the bag.
Health insurance is for the vast majority of people required in some form under the rules of the ACA.
Insurance in the most basic sense is a pooling or risk. A universal single payer healthcare system is simply a pool that everyone is a part of by default. There’s a lot to be said for having a single entity to contact for payments, but you can be sure that even if we fully did away with the insurance system as it is today that there’s not going to be a ‘free MRI Wednesday’ in exchange for it. Someone will always be looking to keep a check on who spends howuch on what.
No US laws. There are other countries outside the US though. There are indeed laws in my jurisdiction that mandate insurance and If you can’t afford to live in the city, there are no jobs without a car.
I don’t doubt the US is that way, but the US has a very unique system when it comes to healthcare and insurance generally.
Also the first result in Google suggests there are indeed jurisdictions in the US that penalize a lack of insurance. You should have clicked your own link lol.
there are indeed jurisdictions in the US that penalize a lack of insurance
This isn’t how one would define “illegal to not have.” See, making it a penalty for not having, doesn’t default to being illegal for not having- which means it’s not mandatory. Which means-
You should have tried to understand what it was I was saying lol.
Same “logic” as saying that “no one is forcing you to eat”.
In reality those who do have an option to not drive are in certain professional occupations (basically office jobs with remote working) and/or live in certain places (such as city centers were housing costs are much higher).
The forcing to drive isn’t done via a clear explicitly written law that sets penalities for people who don’t drive (clearly the only level of extremely painfuly obvious limitation that certain people need to identify it as an imposed choice), it’s done by removing choices from people or artifically making other choices be very negative, for example by giving so much room to cars and such weak penalties for running over cyclists that cycling becomes very dangerous, by outside city centers not having proper pedestrian walkways or by how Land Property laws inflated the price of housing - a life essential - to such level that many people can’t afford to live near work and have to commute to it, which they can’t do with public transportation because no such thing is provided or is laughably inadequate.
The “forcing” isn’t don’t in a “so painfully obvious that even a simpletion gets it” way, it’s done via removing of making unviable choices at multiple levels and isn’t equal for everybody - generally the less well of you are the worse it gets (for example people whose bank of mommy and daddy paid for their higher education so that generally they earn enough to have access to the kind of housing and/or be in a profession were, unlike the others, they do have a real choice not to drive).
(I actually don’t drive, and I’ve chosen not to drive because I can and I do think more people who do have a choice not to drive should do it like I do and walk or cycle to work, or even work from home, but I also hail from a poor working class background and don’t run around with well-off middle class delusions that my somewhat priviledged situation is typical rather than atypical)
No insurance is mandatory.
That’s just not true, at all.
Car insurance is mandatory if you have a car in the us and health insurance is mandatory in many states in the US.
Many landlords require renters insurance, and banks require homeowners insurance.
In my state workers comp insurance is mandatory if you have more than three employees.
Banks are required to have fdic insurance. I’m sure there are many more examples, but that is just off the top of my head.
Yeah but you could just not have a job, a house, health insurance, a bank account, or a car! /s
Kidding obviously, it’s illegal to be homeless as well
houses don’t need insurance once you own one.
True, you could spend ages 40-70 paying off a house that has all of your life’s work invested in it and then stop insuring it. Assuming you make enough money to not have to refinance it or take a reverse mortgage to pay for your medical bills that started piling up in your late 60s
Apparently someone doesn’t think that happens. But that’s what happens to the people I have known. Medical bills to reverse mortgage… Then sell what’s left of the equity to have assisted living for the last year or so when you’ve gotten to be more than anyone in the family can manage while trying to work and take care of their family/selves. When they die there is usually nothing left.
The American dream
Vehicle and property insurances are a public good safety measure. If you go and cause serious injury to someone with your vehicle or in your home they have every right to expect to be made whole again. Without that insurance you would personally be liable for those debts. Unless you’re willing to say that those kind of debts are not dischargeable in bankruptcy then insurance to cover them is essential for anyone who doesn’t have a few hundred thousand laying around.
Workers comp is useful much the same way, unless you want that dim employee who cuts their hand off to be the death of your business.
FDIC helps ensure that some fool tanking every asset the bank has won’t leave the depositors holding the bag.
Health insurance is for the vast majority of people required in some form under the rules of the ACA.
Insurance in the most basic sense is a pooling or risk. A universal single payer healthcare system is simply a pool that everyone is a part of by default. There’s a lot to be said for having a single entity to contact for payments, but you can be sure that even if we fully did away with the insurance system as it is today that there’s not going to be a ‘free MRI Wednesday’ in exchange for it. Someone will always be looking to keep a check on who spends howuch on what.
You aren’t forced to have any of those things.
Define “forced to”
Do you really not know what it means?
I’m more curious what it means to you
This statement is incorrect
What? Business insurance, healthcare, third party property, indemnity.
Try driving a car without insurance and you’ll be arrested in many jurisdictions.
Then don’t drive a car. No one is forcing you to.
And health insurance isn’t mandatory. Sorry this flies in the face of manufactured outrage, but there’s no law that dictates you must have insurance.
It’s an option.
No US laws. There are other countries outside the US though. There are indeed laws in my jurisdiction that mandate insurance and If you can’t afford to live in the city, there are no jobs without a car.
I don’t doubt the US is that way, but the US has a very unique system when it comes to healthcare and insurance generally.
Also the first result in Google suggests there are indeed jurisdictions in the US that penalize a lack of insurance. You should have clicked your own link lol.
This isn’t how one would define “illegal to not have.” See, making it a penalty for not having, doesn’t default to being illegal for not having- which means it’s not mandatory. Which means-
You should have tried to understand what it was I was saying lol.
If you need To drive you need to have insurance It’s not an option to not drive in many places
No one is forcing you to drive anywhere.
Same “logic” as saying that “no one is forcing you to eat”.
In reality those who do have an option to not drive are in certain professional occupations (basically office jobs with remote working) and/or live in certain places (such as city centers were housing costs are much higher).
The forcing to drive isn’t done via a clear explicitly written law that sets penalities for people who don’t drive (clearly the only level of extremely painfuly obvious limitation that certain people need to identify it as an imposed choice), it’s done by removing choices from people or artifically making other choices be very negative, for example by giving so much room to cars and such weak penalties for running over cyclists that cycling becomes very dangerous, by outside city centers not having proper pedestrian walkways or by how Land Property laws inflated the price of housing - a life essential - to such level that many people can’t afford to live near work and have to commute to it, which they can’t do with public transportation because no such thing is provided or is laughably inadequate.
The “forcing” isn’t don’t in a “so painfully obvious that even a simpletion gets it” way, it’s done via removing of making unviable choices at multiple levels and isn’t equal for everybody - generally the less well of you are the worse it gets (for example people whose bank of mommy and daddy paid for their higher education so that generally they earn enough to have access to the kind of housing and/or be in a profession were, unlike the others, they do have a real choice not to drive).
(I actually don’t drive, and I’ve chosen not to drive because I can and I do think more people who do have a choice not to drive should do it like I do and walk or cycle to work, or even work from home, but I also hail from a poor working class background and don’t run around with well-off middle class delusions that my somewhat priviledged situation is typical rather than atypical)
Bus
Taxi
Uber
Bike
No excuses.