Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re: fuel prices

Subject: Re: [OM] Re: fuel prices
From: gma <gma@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 21:17:35 -0700
Just a brief reply, then this thread dies for me.  What I was referring to is a
push by certain political groups to get insurance companies to raise insurance
rates on "big" SUVs. The argument put forth by these politicos is that when
these big SUVs hit a small car, the small car gets damaged more than the big
SUV.  (duh -ed.)  This is really happening and actually looks like it will
succeed.  I find this argument preposterous. They are not arguing that SUVs get
in more accidents, just that they cause more damage - to the other guy.  Now,
I'm not an actuary, but I believe usually insurance rates are based on
loss/risk assessment.  If an SUV hits a Civic and the Civic gets creamed it's
the Civic that has the higher loss/risk. Is it the SUVs fault for being big?
Or is it the fault of the one who chose to take their chances in a little car?
Why do people want to force THEIR choices on someone else? SUVs serve
legitimate purposes. Perhaps we should take this logic all the way and raise
rates on anything bigger than a Civic?  In fact, let's just ban anything bigger
than a Civic. Including 18-wheelers. And trains and, of course, buses.




Denton Taylor wrote:

> It's your fault (collectively, not personally) because you kill people.

I haven't killed anyone with an SUV, nor am I dead. In fact, knock wood, never
been
in an accident in one.  I drive more cautiously in my Tahoe than I do in my car
or even on my motorcycle.  I have to, because of the type vehicle it is.

> And you are paying higher rates because you kill yourselves.

If I kill myself, my rate goes to $0.

> Because they hit curbs and roll. Because
> they go around curves and roll. Guys that drive these things are getting a
> huge free ride because they are classified as trucks, and therefore do not
> need to meet the same safety regs as cars.

How about the gals who drive 'em?  My Tahoe has dual airbags, head restraints,
lap and shoulder belts, side door beams, what's missing in safety dept?  Where
is this huge free ride?

> In fact, they should, because
> they are being used as cars. I don't remember seeing anyone driving a
> Lincoln Navigator with a few bags of cement and some 4x8's sticking out of
> the rear...

I've driven both my Tahoe and my Jeep in this manner.  I don't see your point.

>
>
> As strongly as I feel that they are wasteful and dangerous, I do not
> support any government regulation against them, except for the fact that
> since they are being used as cars, they should be treated like cars.

Absolutely agree.

>
>
> But you should also admit that insurance companies are the ultimate arbiter
> in a free market. If a group like yours costs them money, you gotta pay.
> What's wrong with that? Pay up or get a car. Markets are efficient...

See above

george

> Regards,
>
> Denton Taylor
> _______________________________
> Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com




< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz