How many % of your income do you spend on transportation?

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

OK, now how do you pick out those "irresponsible" drivers before they hit you?

You don't. If they hit you, you can sue them. In fact, even if they DO have liability insurance and they have a crummy, cheap insurance company that doesn't want to settle the claim properly you will have to do exactly that to get paid.

Or maybe no one should be allowed to drive unless they can post a cash bond that's large enough ($50K, maybe?) to cover potential damages.

You have a lot to learn about how insurance works and you are missing the point. I suggest you read the link I posted and digest it. Mandatory liability insurance does not protect you from the actions of others at all! It only protects others from YOUR assumed irresponsibility - and at your expense.

There are a lot of people driving who can't afford it. But if I have $50,000 to post as a bond to self-insure myself, why should I not be allowed to do so? Because the state won't allow it and the insurance companies won't make any profit on it, that's why.

We have been through this discussion before. One of the few states that supposedly does not require mandatory liability insurance requires a cash bond in lieu of it (as I recall it is Virginia that offers that) - but that state cleverly collects a very hefty added 'fee' (read: TAX) for choosing that alternative: which makes just as expensive as if you had bought the mandatory liability policy! That's really not a choice at all, and they know it!

So who do you prefer being bilked by? The State? Or the insurance industry?

[Arragonis]

Had someone try and sell me solar panels yesterday. This on the same day that uk.gov decided to ponder slashing the Feed In Tarrifs (FITs) which the sales guy was suggesting would pay for them.

[dcb]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

...
You have a lot to learn about how insurance works and you are missing the point. I suggest you read the link I posted and digest it.

You might be wanting to do some homework before you start typing too.

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

There are a lot of people driving who can't afford it. But if I have $50,000 to post as a bond to self-insure myself, why should I not be allowed to do so? Because the state won't allow it and the insurance companies won't make any profit on it, that's why.

A lot of states will allow you to post cash in lieu of buying insurance, new york does not appear to be among them though.

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

One of the few states that supposedly does not require mandatory liability insurance requires a cash bond in lieu of it (as I recall it is Virginia that offers that) - but that state cleverly collects a very hefty added 'fee' (read: TAX) for choosing that alternative.

Two problems,
1. there are actually many states that allow a cash bond.

2. Virginia actually does NOT allow private vehicles to have a cash bond in lieu of insurance, but they do "allow" you to pay $500 to register as uninsured. Which is "fair" considering that other drivers are paying extra for insurance to use the road. I guess you wind up paying the $500/year if circumstance has you in a much more expensive liability bracket.

Virginia Car Insurance Center - Get VA Auto Insurance Quotes from Multiple Providers at DMV.org: The Unofficial DMV Guide

You need to be careful when reporting on other states that you know little about or are too lazy to research on your own. If you are parroting some other source with an agenda, don't. You are responsible for the accuracy of the information you post.

[PaleMelanesian]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

A kind of interesting side question would be how much % of your income do you spend on energy in total - by which I mean direct energy (i.e. electric, gas (as in heating), coal, wood, biomass etc. - as opposed to energy used in manufacturing/growing/processing the things you buy), for your home ?

My average power bill is about £150 a month, making nearly £2k a year. That matches what I spend on transport easily.

Here anything over 20% on energy is the threshold for "fuel poverty".

I'm at 22% for all vehicle expenses and electric. Somehow I don't feel impoverished, though. I spent the last few years building up a fund and just purchased a new high-efficiency heat pump / AC unit. That should reduce my total to 20% (conservative estimate, hopefully even less).

[Arragonis]

I suppose AC for you is like heat for us. We replaced our condensor boiler (hot water heating system / hot tap water) just before last winter, and that cut the bill by about 15%. Added cavity insulation (houses here are brick with air-blocks in between) last spring so hopefully that should help some more. Just need to do my loft space floor but that means emptying everything out, no time so far

EDIT -

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

I'm at 22% for all vehicle expenses and electric.

Do you mean 22% each or combined ? I got the stat wrong, apparently it is if you use more than 10% of your income to maintain a reasonable heat regime in your house. Not sure if income is gross or net of tax, or what a reasonable heat regime is specifically.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by dcb

You might be wanting to do some homework before you start typing too.

I already did, as we covered this exact same topic in another thread.

A lot of states will allow you to post cash in lieu of buying insurance, new york does not appear to be among them though.

That is incorrect so "(y)ou might be wanting to do some homework before you start typing too." Liability insurance is mandatory in all states except New Hampshire, and there's the bond issue in Virginia and apparently Wisconsin. (Click here)

Two problems,
1. there are actually many states that allow a cash bond.

The only problem here is that you keep repeating something that is not true.

2. Virginia actually does NOT allow private vehicles to have a cash bond in lieu of insurance, but they do "allow" you to pay $500 to register as uninsured.

Which is why it amounts to a sham. Its a fee or a tax levy no matter what it is called.

Which is "fair" considering that other drivers are paying extra for insurance to use the road.

Requiring mandatory liability insurance has to do with LIABILITY. It has nothing to do with road use. In many states there is also a road use fee, and vehicle weight fees, not to mention gasoline taxes that are supposed to be used for road use and maintenance.

I guess you wind up paying the $500/year if circumstance has you in a much more expensive liability bracket.

I personally am in the lowest liability bracket, yet it is still a large expense because I live in a comparatively densely populated area. However, that's like saying that the suffering is less, so no one should complain about the mandatory nature of it.

You need to be careful when reporting on other states that you know little about or are too lazy to research on your own. If you are parroting some other source with an agenda, don't. You are responsible for the accuracy of the information you post.

You need to read what I wrote and comprehend it. The Virginia fee negates any savings because it equals or exceeds what you would pay for the mandatory liability insurance. You either pay the insurance industry, or you pay the government. Either way you pay and gain nothing for your money (unless you cause a chargeable accident).

And before you lecture and belittle me about citing misinformation, it is time for you to correct your own falsehoods. Go read the link provided that describes New Hampshire and Wisconsin. Then go complain to the folks in New Hampshire about how "unfair" they are.

[PaleMelanesian]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

I suppose AC for you is like heat for us. We replaced our condensor boiler (hot water heating system / hot tap water) just before last winter, and that cut the bill by about 15%. Added cavity insulation (houses here are brick with air-blocks in between) last spring so hopefully that should help some more. Just need to do my loft space floor but that means emptying everything out, no time so far

EDIT -

Do you mean 22% each or combined ? I got the stat wrong, apparently it is if you use more than 10% of your income to maintain a reasonable heat regime in your house. Not sure if income is gross or net of tax, or what a reasonable heat regime is specifically.

22% combined. 6% for all-electric heating and cooling and cooking and lights, and 15% total for gas/repairs/insurance for two vehicles.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

You don't. If they hit you, you can sue them. In fact, even if they DO have liability insurance and they have a crummy, cheap insurance company that doesn't want to settle the claim properly you will have to do exactly that to get paid.

So what good does it do to sue them if they don't have any assets?

At least with the cheap insurance company, you can be fairly certain that there are some assets there, so suing wouldn't be just pissing away more money on lawyer fees.

As for the irresponsibility, sure, we all know you're Superman, and will not only never make a mistake, but will never suffer a heart attack, stroke, or some other medical problem while you're driving, will never have some part of your car fail...

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

22% combined. 6% for all-electric heating and cooling and cooking and lights, and 15% total for gas/repairs/insurance for two vehicles.

6% would put you outside the "fuel poverty" limit . Transport costs are high but you guys in the US do more miles than we (in the UK) do. Our European neighbours also do more miles as they can drive most places - we have to cross the channel (aka "the moat") first

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

So what good does it do to sue them if they don't have any assets?

Most people have some assets. Besides, if you want to buy insurance to be covered for uninsured motorists, no one is stopping you from buying it or forcing you to buy it. Indeed, as I mentioned earlier, in most states the coverage for uminsured motorists is not included in the mandatory insurance you must carry!

Your defense of mandated liability insurance is flawed in that it is intended to prevent uninsured motorists from driving. Does it? Obviously not, because they are still out there driving.

As for the irresponsibility, sure, we all know you're Superman, and will not only never make a mistake, but will never suffer a heart attack, stroke, or some other medical problem while you're driving, will never have some part of your car fail...

You now present a semi-sarcastic angle that is far more unlikely than the way in which most accidents occur. Insurance is all about risk. Freedom is all about choice. Mandating that insurance policies be bought regardless of someone's personal responsibility or ability to pay for any damages incurred is a denial of that freedom. The bottom line is that you are forced to fund accidents that are caused by others.

I can well afford to buy insurance or be self-insured. Even in states where insurance is not mandatory, you still need to be able to pay damages. The link I posted explained that. But as usual, you either still don't understand that or else you ignore such points and bring out a 'straw man' tactic of argument.