3 ms·
>which seems inconsistent with your claim that widespread car ownership is the product of onerous regulation. how is this inconsistent? Insurance raises have t
by Barrin92 3y ago
>which seems inconsistent with your claim that widespread car ownership is the product of onerous regulation.
how is this inconsistent? Insurance raises have to be approved at the state level, again this is not a free market, and for political reasons many states have kept insurance rates at decades old price levels. Insurers actually lose money in most places because they cannot raise prices. (https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-insurance-in-america-is-actually-too-cheap https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/01/18/why-car-i...) and as a result often health insurance and other institutions have to cover the cost, which is to say the public pays.
Just to see how absurd this is. Minimum liability in a lot of states is 50k. In Germany and much of Europe minimum liability is seven million.
It's the governments job to take externalities into account and design urban environments rationally, not to coddle car obsessed consumers and have everyone else pay for the cost they impose on others and the environment.
- philwelch 3y ago> Just to see how absurd this is. Minimum liability in a lot of states is 50k. In Germany and much of Europe minimum liability is seven million. Without regulation, minimum liability would be zero. > It's the governments job to take externalities into account and design urban environments rationally, not to coddle car obsessed consumers Finally your true colors come out. You believe the government’s job is to decide for us what we should want and then shape the regulatory environment in such a way as to shape our behavior, because they know better than we do. You’re the authoritarian trying to redesign society. Just own up to it and be honest with yourself instead of cynically and disingenuously trying to argue based on principles you don’t even hold.