Ontario Auto insurance

[Alta4ever]

The possibility is certainly not zero, but it diminishes significantly with lower speeds, both in terms of stopping time and kinetic energy to transfer (since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity). All the more reason for me to exercise caution.

It doesn't matter matter what you believe its what can happen, no matter how much caution you exercise you can and will make mistakes.

[Michael Hardner]

The possibility is certainly not zero, but it diminishes significantly with lower speeds, both in terms of stopping time and kinetic energy to transfer (since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity). All the more reason for me to exercise caution.

Well, you're right, but nobody is perfect and I'm sure there are cases of people making mistakes that caused accidents, mistakes that are not strictly illegal, like being distracted... not braking in time.

It's good to hear that you bike safely though.

[P. McGee]

It doesn't matter matter what you believe its what can happen, no matter how much caution you exercise you can and will make mistakes.

I was arguing that the potential consequences of my mistakes diminish at lower speeds, and my rationale for saying so was based on physics rather than just belief.

[dre]

Auto insurance is nothing more than a system that redistributes wealth from safe drivers to the victims of dangerous ones, and takes a whole pile of extra money to distribute amongst share holders.

I think that if you can prove you have enough resources to settle a claim yourself you should be able to drive without it. Iv probably paid upwards of 20 thousand dollars in insurance over the last few years. I have 2 vehicles, a boat, a 14000 lb dump trailer, an excavator, and an ATV hauler. I have enough resources and good enough credit to settle a claim myself so why did I pay that 20 000 dollars? Every penny of it either went into the pockets of some shareholder or to subsidize shitty drivers.

Id like to see the insurance system replaced by a system of government backed loan guarantees. If you cause an accident and dont have the money to pay for it, then the government will provide you with a low interest loan, that you will have to pay off over a given ammount of time. But you WILL have to pay it back, and pay for your own mistake.

The problem is that "insurance" takes away personal responsibility, and forces responsible actors to subisidize the mistakes of bad actors. There would be less accidents under my system because each driver knows that instead of having OTHER drivers pay for their mistakes, they will eventually have to pay themselves.

Edited August 19, 2010 by dre

[P. McGee]

Id like to see the insurance system replaced by a system of government backed loan guarantees. If you cause an accident and dont have the money to pay for it, then the government will provide you with a low interest loan, that you will have to pay off over a given ammount of time. But you WILL have to pay it back, and pay for your own mistake.

The problem is that "insurance" takes away personal responsibility, and forces responsible actors to subisidize the mistakes of bad actors. There would be less accidents under my system because each driver knows that instead of having OTHER drivers pay for their mistakes, they will eventually have to pay themselves.

I think your premise and the system you propose make a lot of sense, although I can't see that getting backed by either of the big two Ontario parties any time soon. Are you saying that purchasing insurance would no longer be an option though? That would probably be a much tougher sell to a lot of people.

[M.Dancer]

Some interesting points here...

Auto insurance is nothing more than a system that redistributes wealth from safe drivers to the victims of dangerous ones, and takes a whole pile of extra money to distribute amongst share holders.

I believe the correct definition is it redistributes risk.

I think that if you can prove you have enough resources to settle a claim yourself you should be able to drive without it. Iv probably paid upwards of 20 thousand dollars in insurance over the last few years. I have 2 vehicles, a boat, a 14000 lb dump trailer, an excavator, and an ATV hauler. I have enough resources and good enough credit to settle a claim myself so why did I pay that 20 000 dollars? Every penny of it either went into the pockets of some shareholder or to subsidize shitty drivers.

Two things right off....

1) The more you have, the more you can be sued for...

2)what would the proper amount be? 5 million? 10 million? Killing me might only be worth the costs of a funeral...running over someone valuable could set you back real deep.

Id like to see the insurance system replaced by a system of government backed loan guarantees. If you cause an accident and dont have the money to pay for it, then the government will provide you with a low interest loan, that you will have to pay off over a given ammount of time. But you WILL have to pay it back, and pay for your own mistake.

Well that might work for an affluent indvidual in their prime....but would anyone extend a million dollar loan to a 62 year old? They would be dead before they paid it back.

The problem is that "insurance" takes away personal responsibility, and forces responsible actors to subisidize the mistakes of bad actors. There would be less accidents under my system because each driver knows that instead of having OTHER drivers pay for their mistakes, they will eventually have to pay themselves.

...or not pay for it because they are driven (pun intended) into bankruptcy.

[Alta4ever]

I was arguing that the potential consequences of my mistakes diminish at lower speeds, and my rationale for saying so was based on physics rather than just belief.

What are the physics of you falling on a child? It is a belief that you won't hurt anyone, but it can still happen.

[Alta4ever]

I think your premise and the system you propose make a lot of sense, although I can't see that getting backed by either of the big two Ontario parties any time soon. Are you saying that purchasing insurance would no longer be an option though? That would probably be a much tougher sell to a lot of people.

He is saying you should learn that dre also seems not to understand you can't get blood from a stone.

[P. McGee]

Well that might work for an affluent indvidual in their prime....but would anyone extend a million dollar loan to a 62 year old? They would be dead before they paid it back.

Under dre's system I think it would be prudent to still require liability insurance for proven bad drivers, which might reduce the likelihood of scenarios like this. There would of course be situations where the govt would be stuck with the bill as you suggest. I don't know a lot about bankruptcy but could people with such debts be prevented somehow from declaring it?

[M.Dancer]

Under dre's system I think it would be prudent to still require liability insurance for proven bad drivers, which might reduce the likelihood of scenarios like this.

Good drivers have accidents too

There would of course be situations where the govt would be stuck with the bill as you suggest. I don't know a lot about bankruptcy but could people with such debts be prevented somehow from declaring it?

Nope...if your debts far exceed your ability to pay, you go bankrupt.

[Alta4ever]

Under dre's system I think it would be prudent to still require liability insurance for proven bad drivers, which might reduce the likelihood of scenarios like this. There would of course be situations where the govt would be stuck with the bill as you suggest. I don't know a lot about bankruptcy but could people with such debts be prevented somehow from declaring it?

The insurance model is the one that works best and is far simpler then what you propose. Your problem is that you see no value in an insurance policy because you have not needed one yet, but the day will come and when that day does you will be glad you had it.

[P. McGee]

He is saying you should learn that dre also seems not to understand you can't get blood from a stone.

I'm having a bit of trouble deciphering this. Who is saying that who should learn that dre also seems not to understand you can't get blood from a stone? The "blood from a stone" reference I can understand as a criticism of dre's plan: some will never be able to cover the debts they incur. The plan may not be workable as proposed but I agree with the premise that there should be greater incentives to avoid accidents.

[Alta4ever]

I'm having a bit of trouble deciphering this. Who is saying that who should learn that dre also seems not to understand you can't get blood from a stone? The "blood from a stone" reference I can understand as a criticism of dre's plan: some will never be able to cover the debts they incur. The plan may not be workable as proposed but I agree with the premise that there should be greater incentives to avoid accidents.

If you can't cover the debt who then does? If you are require those who do not have the means to cover the debt then buy liability insurance, you've got the same system we are operating now.

If you want to insure a vehicle you are only required to buy a minimum amount in Alberta it is 200,000. Basically you are self insuring against any claim that may arise above that amount. So if you have a claim against you of 500,000 the insurance company will pay 200,000 and you are required to pay the rest. IF you have the borrowing capacity you can take out a loan and pay it back over time, if not you will be selling off your assets to pay it, and what ever the short fall is after that will be paid over time as described by the court.

So if you do as you advocate one claim can have the effect of destroying your standard of living for the rest of your life, because you may have made one small driving error.

[P. McGee]

So if you do as you advocate one claim can have the effect of destroying your standard of living for the rest of your life, because you may have made one small driving error.

For that to occur, the driver would likely have made a lasting impact on another person's quality of life. I'm not sure it's a bad thing that the consequences of such a mistake would be long-lasting and unpleasant.

[Alta4ever]

For that to occur, the driver would likely have made a lasting impact on another person's quality of life. I'm not sure it's a bad thing that the consequences of such a mistake would be long-lasting and unpleasant.

You would be surprised how fast costs add up in claims that involve bodily injury.

Would you at 25 years of age like to have your life crippled because you missed a stop sign, hit someone and have to pay the litigation costs and awarded damages for the rest of your life? Taking the majority of your income for the better part of your life. Taking any wealth you had accumulated to that point in your life leaving you destitute with nothing, and no hope of bettering yourself?

That is why we have liability insurance, so you will have the ability to move your life forward after such an event.

[P. McGee]

You would be surprised how fast costs add up in claims that involve bodily injury.

Would you at 25 years of age like to have your life crippled because you missed a stop sign, hit someone and have to pay the litigation costs and awarded damages for the rest of your life? Taking the majority of your income for the better part of your life. Taking any wealth you had accumulated to that point in your life leaving you destitute with nothing, and no hope of bettering yourself?

That is why we have liability insurance, so you will have the ability to move your life forward after such an event.

It's strange that you would use the word "crippled" to describe the plight of a driver who seriously injured someone and suffered financially because of it.

(previous comment retracted)

Edited August 20, 2010 by P. McGee

[Bryan]

And yet you still pay to much. I can insure two vehicles much cheaper in Alberta then in MB or BC.

I'm not so sure. When I put my info into this site: https://www.kanetix.ca

The quotes it gives me are all several hundred dollars more than what I'm paying with MPI.

[Alta4ever]

I'm not so sure. When I put my info into this site: https://www.kanetix.ca

The quotes it gives me are all several hundred dollars more than what I'm paying with MPI.

Kantex does not quote all of the companies, when I was a broker here I had close to 30 different markets to choose from. 12 where main line markets. I insure 3 vehicles and pay 2700/ year. Two are luxury vehicles and one pick up. You also have to make sure you are comparing the same coverages. The luxury vehicles are full coverage the truck is liability and comp. It also makes a difference where you live so if you quote edmonton or calgary you will get a higher rate then in other jurisdictions in Alberta. So if you don't live in Winnipeg you will want to compare with a rate from a town not a city, if you live in Winnipeg then you will want to compare a rate with something that is about the same driving conditions like red deer.

If you're younger then 25 your rates will be cheaper, because in Gov auto provinces you are subsidized by the more experienced drivers.

[Smallc]

And yet you still pay to much. I can insure two vehicles much cheaper in Alberta then in MB or BC.

That's because the insurance that you're buying is illegal in Manitoba. There is no such thing as what you would call basic insurance. $500 is the most basic deductible, and the lowest liability is several hundred thousand.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Smallc

[Alta4ever]

That's because the insurance that you're buying is illegal in Manitoba. There is no such thing as what you would call basic insurance. $500 is the most basic deductible, and the lowest liability is several hundred thousand.

Those two vehicles have full coverage 500 ded coll, 250 ded comp 2 mil liability not to all the endorsements added.

[Smallc]

Those two vehicles have full coverage 500 ded coll, 250 ded comp 2 mil liability not to all the endorsements added.

In Manitoba deductibles start a $500 and go down to $100. The insurance is far more comprehensive than what you would be used to. It covers literally everything.

[Alta4ever]

In Manitoba deductibles start a $500 and go down to $100. The insurance is far more comprehensive than what you would be used to. It covers literally everything.

Actually it doesn't, have you ever read your policy wordings.

[Smallc]

Actually it doesn't, have you ever read your policy wordings.

It covers virtually everything then. Better? There is also zero deductible at many levels for theft and wildlife damage, and at the lowest level, there is zero deductible for glass damage.

[Alta4ever]

It covers virtually everything then. Better? There is also zero deductible at many levels for theft and wildlife damage, and at the lowest level, there is zero deductible for glass damage.

To get the coverage I have (your equivalent in MB) you have to buy an extension package plus a deductible buy down.

Yes I do know what MPI covers, I have been dealing with MB brokers for years.

[Bryan]

I've yet to see a case where private insurance in Canada or the US can compete with the coverage and price we get. I've seen many people make the claim, but when I actually check what my cars would cost with their providers, it costs a lot more.

Post some links if you've got better providers, I'd really like to see them.