Posted On: March 20, 2006, 2:08 pm CST

Posted By: indemnity

I too am for personal responsibility, but where do we draw the line here. If I have a fire at home because I accidentally overloaded a circuit, or left the iron on, does that mean I should be penalized by no being indemnified for my claim? Will the insurer now ask the insured to prove possesion of their keys every time a car is stolen? What is to keep the insured from just having a spare set at home?
Part of the reason I have insurance is so I don't have to worry about stupid stuff like forgeting my keys in the car or forgetting to lock one of my doors to my house when I leave. Yes, there are morale hazards involved in insurance, but for they are built into the rate.

Yes, we pay more because some people are stupid and leave their keys in the car on a regular basis. We are also paying more because they drive like idiots. Either way, the punishment is built into the rate, not into the indeminification which is the basis of insurance. If I pay the premium, I expect to be indemnified for my loss, whether it is my fault or not. If I wreck my car in a one car accident, I am still indemnified for my medical expenses and damage to my car. That is the reason I buy insurance. To be made whole, whether it is my fault or some one elses.

If we are going to take personal responsibility to its fullest extent, then get rid of insurance entirely.