Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 116 posts

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#61

Post by scottLobster »

lovich wrote: post #18
scottLobster wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No shit. And you're suggesting lots of financial pain for people who can't afford it in the name of your ideology.

All change from the status quo causes financial pain, usually for the people who can’t afford it. The OP also didn’t suggest or implement the change, but only commented that they liked the results with regard to car ownership and use

Oh, so it wasn't to be taken seriously. Well that's good, because if taken seriously you'd be talking about taking food out of my children's mouths to pay for your fantasy transportation infrastructure that wouldn't pay for itself due to population density, likely be poorly implemented while restricting my freedom of movement, and I make enough that I could eat those costs better than most. I'm annoyed at the terminally-online "I just discovered NotJustBikes and I'm "radicalized"" nature of the idea but there are tens of millions of people for whom it would be an existential issue.

How about we eminent-domain wherever you live to build a train line? Oh that wouldn't be a problem for you? Congrats on being in the top 10% at least.

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#62

Post by thayne »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #10
baggy_trough wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, the more expensive driving a car is, the better! What an astonishing statement.

Disincentives a suboptimal transportation option. Price signals are important, just like making it expensive to own property where the risk is too high. Automotive ownership and transportation is likely to never be as inexpensive as it previously was. You will either need to pay the cost or live somewhere you don’t need a car.

It doesn't really matter if you disincentivise it if there isn't an alternative, or the alternatives are even worse, as is currently the case in many parts of the US.

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#63

Post by silisili »

kccqzy wrote: post #49
silisili wrote: post #39

I keep reading about ridiculous insurance prices the last few years, but it seemingly never affects me. Do most people tend to get lots of moving violations and in accidents or something? I have two vehicles, mid range limits, one brand new with full coverage, and one a bit older with liability, and for two drivers the bill is around $1200 a year. I know kids of course get a higher rate, but even so, $20k seems a bit…

I have the same bill as yours, $1200 per year, for two adult drivers. The $20k is for four kids, which is believable, since $5000 for a young driver is reasonable.

I guess I didn't realize insurance for kids was now that expensive. That's insane! I have a few years til mine is able to drive, that's going to be a fun conversation...

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#64

Post by mtalantikite »

scottLobster wrote: post #29
PreInternet01 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm not suggesting any kind of financial pain at all. Do I support the ability of people to travel to their job, shopping centers, or any destination they like? Absolutely! Do I think a privately owned vehicle, which spends 90%+ of its active life being parked in spaces that could be utilized much better otherwise, is the best way to achieve those abilities? Nope. Sorry.

Oh, so you're in favor of playing Sim-City with the infinite money cheat codes. Cool. Because if you were suggesting that in the real world then, at least in America, you're suggesting a complete overhaul of almost all transportation infrastructure and saying that no average person will have to spend an extra dollar to pay for it somehow. Is Mexico paying for it or something?

I mean it's not like we don't spend $100B+ per year on infrastructure, much of it for roads and other car based transport methods [1]. We could instead invest it in subway and other public transit infrastructure, rather than on exceptionally inefficient, expensive, and environmentally costly modes of transport.

[1] https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/transportation-infra... -- note that rail expenditure isn't all public transport, the majority of US rail infrastructure is freight transport.

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#65

Post by gosub100 »

RIMR wrote: post #27
baggy_trough wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, the more expensive driving a car is, the better! What an astonishing statement.

Driving is hideously inefficient. It should be the most expensive option, because taking a 2-ton machine with you everywhere you go should be considered a luxury.

Driving is in fact very efficient! It has increased to 100% the likelihood of me NOT accidentally sitting in a homeless person's piss!

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#66

Post by scottLobster »

RIMR wrote: post #31
scottLobster wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, as one of the vast majority of Americans who live in a car-dependent area and aren't made of money, have fun trying to force that on everyone. Also "suboptimal" is a matter of opinion.

Personal automobiles are suboptimal in every measurable metric aside from your subjective "but I like owning a car" opinion.

If you confiscated my car tomorrow, I literally couldn't get to work or buy groceries. That isn't an optimization, it's a hard reality.

Once you've built timely safe replacement infrastructure that can carry me from my home to my place of employment as fast or faster than my current commute, and take me to any of the shops I frequent, and do that for all of my neighbors, and do all of the above in a way that costs less than car ownership, we can talk.

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#67

Post by [deleted] »

RIMR wrote: post #27
baggy_trough wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, the more expensive driving a car is, the better! What an astonishing statement.

Driving is hideously inefficient. It should be the most expensive option, because taking a 2-ton machine with you everywhere you go should be considered a luxury.

[deleted]

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#68

Post by PreInternet01 »

felizuno wrote: post #46
toomuchtodo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disincentives a suboptimal transportation option. Price signals are important, just like making it expensive to own property where the risk is too high. Automotive ownership and transportation is likely to never be as inexpensive as it previously was. You will either need to pay the cost or live somewhere you don’t need a car.

Buses and trains don’t run 24 hours a day. I paid a premium to live a walkable distance to most things I do. We drive so little that I fill my tank once every 2-3 MONTHS. But when my four month old has a fever in the middle of the night I absolutely need my car or I would have to call an ambulance. SMH

If my imaginary four-year-old has a fever in the middle of the night, I first phone the nurse-on-duty, and if they determine I need to go somewhere, I see if there's a nearby shared e-vehicle (and in the middle of the night, it will sure be), and use that. Or, like, call an Uber, which might be slightly faster, but for a fever, well...

And if the situation is truly urgent, they'll send an ambulance, which should take less than 15 minutes, and will offer the best care available in that time window anyway.

And I'm absolutely sure the situation is entirely different where you live, but isn't that the real problem then?

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#69

Post by baggy_trough »

BeetleB wrote: post #40
baggy_trough wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proposed price signal is "the more expensive, the better". So forbidding car ownership, in other words. A deeply destructive point of view.

Deeply destructive, perhaps, but the norm in European countries. They prefer making driving expensive (be it via taxes, or import duties, etc). The US is still far cheaper to drive in, by comparison.

There are European countries that forbid car ownership?

Re: Welcome to the Era of the $20k Family Car Insurance Bill

#70

Post by legitster »

potato3732842 wrote: post #12
legitster wrote: post #3

This article isn't very useful because it doesn't distinguish between liability and collision coverage. It doesn't matter how young the driver is, if you put them in a cheap small used car, you only need liability coverage which is pretty cheap.

That doesn't work in states where the insurance industry has successfully lobbied for laws requiring that all vehicles in a household be cross-insured for every driver in the household.

I've never heard of such a thing. Which states are those?

Geico's only stated recommendation is that anyone who uses the car more than once a month should be on the policy.

Post reply on HN