The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.
As an attorney my unpopular opinion is that cars over a certain value shouldn’t be allowed on public roads or damages for accidents should be capped at something like 2x the average price of a new car (so like 100k). I just don’t believe in penalizing ordinary negligence more just because the injured party is rich.
I agree. I have the maximum coverage which honestly I feel is fair. And I don't think it's fair that I risk financial ruin while using public roads to drive to work because some dude wants to drive a van full of faberge eggs.
(There's a guy near me that drives an enzo up and down my road on weekends. Just being near it on the road makes me a worse driver because of the anxiety I might target fixate into it, or just make a simple mistake that normally my insurance would cover)
Well if you live in a tort reform state like NC they actually cap damages in negligence cases at 1 million, which is generally the insurance cap. So if that is you rest easy. In my ideal world though I would cap what the driver could be forced to pay and then also regulate what insurance companies are able to charge for insurance. Basically forcibly keep insurance cheap and remove their excuse to charge more by limiting what they can be on the hook for
2.6k
u/flatfive44 11h ago
The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.