So, just because it is hard to enforce, we will just overlook it. Kind of like the legalization of Marijuana debate. I know how to enforce it. Just take away the license of anyone caught driving without it. Pretty simple. It wont cost the government much…probably a lot less that what it cost me when a non insurance motorist rear ended me at a stop light and told me “you are going to have to F___ing sue me”. And the cop would not even cite them for “failure to maintain control” or something like that. I feel like I am driving in Mexico up here in Wisconsin.
After you take his license away, what makes you so sure he won’t just borrow another car and go merily down the highway again?
You can have every motor vehicle in the state insured, but if the drivers are not listed on the policy, every driver in the state would be driving without insurance.
If someone totalled your 25,000$ vehicle and the driver at fault was carrying the 10,000 minimum (or whatever), you still have to sue him to get the other 15,000$.
Collision insurance works (pays the entire 25,000$ if are hit by an uninsured driver), mandatory auto insurance doesn’t work and seizing driver’s licenses does not solve the problem. Collision insurance solves the problem.
Great so now we should carry more insurance because some dirt bag doesn’t want to. And then when I make a claim against my policy when that dirt bag hit me without insurance, my insurance premium goes up. Plus, my collision premium is higher simply because there are so many dirt bags driving around to begin with. The same old BS excuse that they wont obey even if it is a law is ridiculous. In that line of thinking, we should just let people drive drunk too. Since most of them wont stop doing it even if there is a law against it. Why do I have to pay for the dirt bags that dont want to. Dont give me this crap about them “not being able to” either. If they cant afford to drive, then they dont. Driving is a privilege. Carrying liability insurance should be a law. Even the cops here in Wisconsin are dumbfounded that it is not required.
There are three studies on mndatory auto insurance causing an increase in hunger. The first study was done by Dr. Maril (head of the Sociology Dept at Eastern Carolina University). This study shows that 44% said they could not buy food due to mandatory auto insurance. (When poor people suddenly have their money taken away that they had been planning to buy food with, don’t they go on food stamps or down to the local food bank?) (http://www.autoreform.org/090998mar.pdf)
I did a survey (badly produced thru the Montana DPHHS) that showed 12 of 96 food stamp applicants in Billings, MT said auto insurance was a reason for needing food stamps. That equals 30,000 over the last 20 years in Montana. (http://www.foodstampstudy.com) Hank Hudson of the Montana DPHHS is incorrect and Allen Nichols is correct, you can indeed have a food stamp skyrocket due to a mandatory auto insurance law.
This site also includes several food stamp skyrockets linked to mandatory auto insurance laws (Santa Fe New Mexico began having food stamp skyrockets in January and February after it enacted its law on January 1, 1984 (began having food stamp skyrockets in the two months license plates were renewed)
We need further surveys on this and the USDA has no objection, but Joan Miles of the Montana DPHHS will not allow further surveys, even with private funding. How’s that for censorship? If a mand auto insurance law increases the nrs on food stamps, this data is required to be included in the fiscal note of the mand auto insurance law. It looks to me as if the budget directors are breaking the law and we should take their driving privileges away for several months.
I really could care a less about any surverys. Especially ones regarding food stamps. What I care about is the jack asses that dont carry auto insurance, drive POS cars and go around bashing into my car and then say “screw it, you will have to take me to court”. They know it isnt worth taking a rock to court. Driving a vehicle is a privilege and not a right. If they cannot afford it, they shouldn’t be driving. Maybe the government should give away free gas because I am sure that isn’t any easier to afford than auto insurance. Wisconsin is just a backwards liberal moronic state. Leave it to them to be one of two states that dont have mandatory auto insurance.
So, just because it is hard to enforce, we will just overlook it. Kind of like the legalization of Marijuana debate. I know how to enforce it. Just take away the license of anyone caught driving without it. Pretty simple. It wont cost the government much…probably a lot less that what it cost me when a non insurance motorist rear ended me at a stop light and told me “you are going to have to F___ing sue me”. And the cop would not even cite them for “failure to maintain control” or something like that. I feel like I am driving in Mexico up here in Wisconsin.
After you take his license away, what makes you so sure he won’t just borrow another car and go merily down the highway again?
You can have every motor vehicle in the state insured, but if the drivers are not listed on the policy, every driver in the state would be driving without insurance.
If someone totalled your 25,000$ vehicle and the driver at fault was carrying the 10,000 minimum (or whatever), you still have to sue him to get the other 15,000$.
Collision insurance works (pays the entire 25,000$ if are hit by an uninsured driver), mandatory auto insurance doesn’t work and seizing driver’s licenses does not solve the problem. Collision insurance solves the problem.
Great so now we should carry more insurance because some dirt bag doesn’t want to. And then when I make a claim against my policy when that dirt bag hit me without insurance, my insurance premium goes up. Plus, my collision premium is higher simply because there are so many dirt bags driving around to begin with. The same old BS excuse that they wont obey even if it is a law is ridiculous. In that line of thinking, we should just let people drive drunk too. Since most of them wont stop doing it even if there is a law against it. Why do I have to pay for the dirt bags that dont want to. Dont give me this crap about them “not being able to” either. If they cant afford to drive, then they dont. Driving is a privilege. Carrying liability insurance should be a law. Even the cops here in Wisconsin are dumbfounded that it is not required.
There are three studies on mndatory auto insurance causing an increase in hunger. The first study was done by Dr. Maril (head of the Sociology Dept at Eastern Carolina University). This study shows that 44% said they could not buy food due to mandatory auto insurance. (When poor people suddenly have their money taken away that they had been planning to buy food with, don’t they go on food stamps or down to the local food bank?) (http://www.autoreform.org/090998mar.pdf)
I did a survey (badly produced thru the Montana DPHHS) that showed 12 of 96 food stamp applicants in Billings, MT said auto insurance was a reason for needing food stamps. That equals 30,000 over the last 20 years in Montana. (http://www.foodstampstudy.com) Hank Hudson of the Montana DPHHS is incorrect and Allen Nichols is correct, you can indeed have a food stamp skyrocket due to a mandatory auto insurance law.
This site also includes several food stamp skyrockets linked to mandatory auto insurance laws (Santa Fe New Mexico began having food stamp skyrockets in January and February after it enacted its law on January 1, 1984 (began having food stamp skyrockets in the two months license plates were renewed)
We need further surveys on this and the USDA has no objection, but Joan Miles of the Montana DPHHS will not allow further surveys, even with private funding. How’s that for censorship? If a mand auto insurance law increases the nrs on food stamps, this data is required to be included in the fiscal note of the mand auto insurance law. It looks to me as if the budget directors are breaking the law and we should take their driving privileges away for several months.
I really could care a less about any surverys. Especially ones regarding food stamps. What I care about is the jack asses that dont carry auto insurance, drive POS cars and go around bashing into my car and then say “screw it, you will have to take me to court”. They know it isnt worth taking a rock to court. Driving a vehicle is a privilege and not a right. If they cannot afford it, they shouldn’t be driving. Maybe the government should give away free gas because I am sure that isn’t any easier to afford than auto insurance. Wisconsin is just a backwards liberal moronic state. Leave it to them to be one of two states that dont have mandatory auto insurance.