3 ms·
> Insurance in general is a whole racket. Its literally only works due to the fact people on average pay more than they receive. "Oh but what if a bad thing hap
by RHSeeger 2y ago
> Insurance in general is a whole racket. Its literally only works due to the fact people on average pay more than they receive. "Oh but what if a bad thing happens" way to live your life, disregarding economics and averages.
That's literally the _entire_ point of insurance. You pay a little more than the average you're expected to actually need so that, in the event of a catastrophic event, your not on the hook for an amount that would destroy you financially. The fact that any sane person would think that you should expect to collect, on average, more from insurance than you pay into it... is baffling to me. Just plain math would show that's impossible.
- iwishiknewlisp 2y agoI am saying insurance as a concept is stupid and anyone who has insurance is dumb except in few rare cases caused by government tipping the scales of the market. The only thing baffling here us your reading comprehension bud. You missed my entire point. You think I think that? Well, if I was on another website I would say something about you as a person about the type of human being who can't even understand what they are reading but then replies with an ignorant comment.
- RHSeeger 2y ago> I am saying insurance as a concept is stupid and anyone who has insurance is dumb except in few rare cases I disagree with this completely. I have a car. I drive safely. It is unlikely that I will get in an accident and hurt someone. But I pay for insurance because it's _possible_ it will happen anyways. If something goes wrong, I could either - Have the insurance I pay for cover the expense of handling it, or - Have everything I own taken from me to cover the expense of handling it The cost of insurance is above the the cost of (<covering the expense of a catastrophic event> * <likelihood of me having such an outcome>), but still very much below the cost of (<covering the expense of a catastrophic event>). As such, it is my belief that it makes sense for me to pay for that insurance. I find it confusing that anyone would believe otherwise. Unless perhaps you're saying that the government should cover all such catastrophic outcomes, which doesn't seem realistic to me. > Well, if I was on another website I would say something about you as a person So, you'll insult me and pretend like you didn't? What are you, 6 years old? Clearly you found it insulting that I could not comprehend your view on the subject (which was not my intent), but seriously?
- iwishiknewlisp 2y agoI didn't read this except the last part. But don't be hostile and insulting if you don't want a responze back. In real life if someone ever talked to me the way you do, it wouldn't be words and it wouldn't a fight. People who insult out of nowhere grew up in the softest environment where you could get away with that. You lived a privileged charmin lifestyle where you could say whatever you wanted and not have any consequences. I wish just for a second i could see you in person. To paint a clearer picture for you since you love to twist whatever I say, certain people from privileged groups have mastered the art of aggression from a thin vaneer of social acceptability. I deny this aggression. If you show me aggression, I don't care what socially acceptable way you show it. This isn't football, in real life its not a game. Your life is a game, never experienced anything real. Suburban fraud.
- RHSeeger 2y agoI wanted to add a side note that I don't believe that all insurance types make sense in every situation. For example, I was presented with the option of buying pet insurance recently. I make enough that, for any given problem my pet might have, I can cover the expense. As such, there is no "catastrophic outcome" that would cause me serious financial harm. That, combined with the fact that the code of pet insurance is slightly higher than the expected cost for everything my pet needs, means it doesn't make sense for me to buy pet insurance. As such, I chose not to. Admittedly, having it since we got her would have wound up saving us money overall, since she's had two CCL surgeries (at ~6-7k a piece). But the decision we made was based on expected cost and averages; so the choice me made was (effectively) a bet that didn't turn out to be the right one. But it generally _would_ be the right one given the facts we had at the time we originally got her.