3 ms·
> if an insurer evaluates your true risk and offers a policy, it's not worth it This is kind of a silly argument. You're paying a little extra to avoid the si
by thedufer 14y ago
> if an insurer evaluates your true risk and offers a policy, it's not worth it
This is kind of a silly argument. You're paying a little extra to avoid the situation of something happening before you've saved enough to replace it.
I go by a more specific, but actually workable, rule: "if an insurer evaluates your true risk and offers a policy _and you can afford to replace it right now_, it's not worth it". For example, I don't buy insurance on electronics - if I couldn't afford to lose it, I would find something cheaper. But I would certainly insure a house, unless I had a couple hundred grand lying around.
- lutusp 14y ago>> if an insurer evaluates your true risk and offers a policy, it's not worth it > This is kind of a silly argument. No, that is a silly argument, because it doesn't offer an explanation. Consider those electronic service plans that retailers are always trying to get you to buy. They's not worth it. How do I know? Because the retailer wants to sell it to me. Therefore he must come out ahead in the transaction. Therefore it's not in my interest -- I would be better off paying for a repair myself, or replacing the item. How difficult is that? It's the same with insurance. If you cannot afford to lose the insured item, by all means insure it. For every other case, think a little harder and you may realize there's a reason the insurance company is so eager to sell you a policy.
- thedufer 14y agoYou're saying exactly the same thing I said. I'm not sure why my version is silly, except that you cut out the explanation part when you quoted me.