In a message dated 8/9/01 11:36:51 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
eddie@mediarchive.com writes:
> I've wondered a similar thing myself. Why can't the insurance be attached to
> the *driver* rather than the car. Or at least split. The liability would
> follow the driver, and the only insurance on the car would be to protect
> the
> car itself (which could be damaged or stolen without you driving it). Car
> insurance to cover the car, driver insurance to cover the driver's actions.
>
> Oh, but wait. Then the insurance companies might lose some income.
> Nevermind.
>
> Eddie
>
Well, as long as we are off topic....sort of. Why not attach an insurance
premium to the drivers license or registration. Not that I want to get the
government involved in anything...But I heard a proposal a few years ago that
liability insurance cost be added to the cost of fuel..so everyone would pay.
I live in an area where it is estimated that 70% of the drivers have no
insurance at all, so it would seem to me that covering all the drivers
through a fuel surcharge would lover the cost per person and at least
eliminate "uninsured motorist" coverage.
Many of the folks here don't have a drivers license either...so fuel, the one
thing everyont has to have would get most of them..except the one that fuel
over the border.
Robert Houston
Be more concerned about your character than about your reputation,
because your character is what you really are, while your reputation
is merely what others think of you.
"Remember, there is no lifeguard in the gene pool." GGLiddy
|