this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
670 points (95.6% liked)

People Twitter

8744 readers
2042 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Insurance is a brilliant, beautiful idea. People come together to pool resources so that in the rare event that a catastrophe befalls someone, that unlucky person does not lose everything.

The idea of insurance went wrong when for-profit companies were allowed to get involved. Public insurance is cheaper and better. I'm not sure if it is still the case today, but until a few years ago public insurance in Saskatchewan cost a couple hundred bucks a year while people in other provinces were paying $1500 for the same coverage.

Here is an exhaustive list of things that were improved when it was made for-profit:

[–] bathroomconnoisseur@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago

Can confirm, SGI still exists in Saskatchewan. It is definitely more than a couple hundred bucks a year but it is nice knowing that they don't make a profit. They sent everyone a rebate a few years ago because they had a surplus

[–] leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The idea is that what you pay goes to a fund that is used when the insurer has to pay a client, therefore socialising the costs of fixing whatever the clients insured.

If every client could get their money back, the company would likely have less money available for the payouts (and would risk everyone taking their money out once a big payout is due), and might go bankrupt if too many payouts come up at once.

So instead the idea is that ideally you end up paying less than you'd get if you needed to fix whatever you're insured for... but it's like a bet: you bet that shit'll happen before you've paid more, the insurer bets that it won't.

Of course, though, like in all businesses based on gambling the house always wins.

Even if they weren't scamming you, they've got actuarial tables telling them how much you have to pay to make sure they'll have a certain amount of profit... but of course they are scamming you, and they'll do everything possible to avoid paying you even in the unlikely event that you fall on the wrong side of the actuarial table.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 6 days ago

Actuarial tables are only used on life (life, retirement, workers compensation, health insurance) on top of them you need guaranteed interest rate and that give the risk price, but can be mathematically prove that charging only the risk price the insurance company eventually is going to fail, so an actuarial rate is added to avoid that. On top of that, another rate is added for administrative costs and "cost of capital" AKA profit for the shareholders. Finally, comercial costs are added and that's the price you pay.

For casualty (no life) the risk price is probability of event × cost of event, the rest is the same.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Wait to get hit?

I don't think you're doing it right.

Step 1 make sure you have gap insurance.

Step 2 never make more than the minimum car payment.

Step 3 when your ready for a new car, side swipe a car on the left and drive into a brick wall on the right. Make sure there are no cameras.

Step 4 enjoy your new car.

Step 5 commit identity fraud so you can keep a low insurance premium!

Step 6 do none of this because it's all crimes. I really hope you read the instructions to the end before starting.

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Hi, I followed your comment while reading it. I'm stuck after step 3, the police are asking lots of questions. Pls help.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

New number

Who dis?

[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 days ago

I really hope you read the instructions to the end before starting.

"Remove the diskette from its protective envelope" (it stayed in the box)
"Take the diskette by one of its corners" ("What corners, it's round?")

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

How about the fact that home insurance doesn't cover preventative care. We had a branch fall on our roof and the insurance had to pay out to get that part of the roof fixed. I pointed out that there's another dead branch up there that I'm a little concerned about hitting the roof, and maybe they would prefer to pay a few hundred to get a guy up there to remove the branch than a few thousand to get the roof repaired the next time, and the insurance company said absolutely not.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 26 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Insurance is about compensation for loss, and that's it. It's not their job to keep your house safe, that's still on you. It's their job to give you money if something happens beyond your control. Now that you mentioned that other branch, you should probably take care of it, if it falls they could deny your claim since you were negligent in preventing a known risk.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Insurance is about compensation for loss, and that’s it.

That's certainly not true of medical insurance. Preventative care is part of the whole package. In fact, certain preventative care is encouraged. Health insurance companies are more than happy to pay for UTIs, for instance, because they're so much cheaper than pregnancies.

[–] rhymeswithduck@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Did you mean IUDs? Can't get preggo from a UTI...

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Did you mean IUDs?

... yes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago

Medical has been warped into a Frankenstein product that is partially insurance, discount club, and prepayment system.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 6 days ago

There is plenty to criticise about insurance companies, how did they stumble upon the one thing that is fine?

[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (4 children)

The point of insurance is to protect your standard of living. If you can absorb the loss of something then you don't need insurance for it(game controller for example). Most people can not absorb the sudden loss of a car(or house). So a company takes on the risk for you for a fee. That's the general idea anyway.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 days ago (3 children)

This is a bunch of bullshit. Car insurance is a massive scam. Do you realize how many millions upon millions upon millions of dollars these companies take in and yet the minute you have to make a claim they fight tooth and nail for every single dollar to keep it in their pocket. It's bullshit it was propagated by lobbyists. Fuck that scam.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Also you are required by law to have car insurance so they can do whatever the fuck they want.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 days ago

We can tell exactly how much fucking money these companies make by the actors they put in their commercials and you know they're not cheap. They're not working for free. And the fact that how much money their CEOs and rest of the c staff are pocketing. Just like medical insurance. It's a bunch of bullshit scam designed to line the pockets of others and push through by lobbyist and politicians that have benefited from monetary bribery.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Even if you can absorb it your still required by law to have it. So no it's nothing like a game controller. Its nothing about protecting your standard of living.

It's about protecting others standard of living from yourself. Insurance end of the day isn't for you, it's for others. So when you fuck up they arnt punished.

To some degree yes it is for yourself but that's by far the least of its reasons for existing. To the point of it being more a happy accident then the intent.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Even if you can absorb it your still required by law to have it.

But the coverage you're required to have isn't for damages to YOUR car, it for you damaging MY car. YOU are required to have insurance so that when you total my car and cripple me for life, you're able to pay that. That's entirely different from a house.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You are not required to have it. If you own the car you do not have to have full coverage.

[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Most people don't know that there is mandatory insurance for damage done to others, plus optional insurance for their own car. Clearly the person in the posted image is one of these people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] brotundspiele@sh.itjust.works 16 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

It's not a scam, it's just how companies work. By definition, every insurance will pay out less than they collected in payments. They have to pay their employees, their offices, taxes an yes, also their shareholders. That's why, on average, insuring something is always a loosing bet.

You should only insure yourself against things that are potentially threatening your or your family's existence: Liability, health, home, occupational disability, survivor benefits. For everything else it's almost always better to just put the money into an account to have it at hand in case.

[–] buttnugget@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (6 children)

Insurance should always be public. If you feel the need to say things like “companies need to pay their shareholders,” you are only one braincell away from saying “gotta keep the lights on”.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] drhodl@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago

I'm currently having some suspect cardiac issues, but my insurance won't pay for "preventative" treatment. I t seems I have to have, and survive, an actual heart attack, in order to be reimbursed for my treatment.

So, just like car insurance, where you can claim only after an accident.

It's fucking stupid and makes no sense, because AFTER an incident is far more expensive....

[–] atcorebcor@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Well because if you crash right after making the insurance there won’t be enough in your “savings”.

[–] just_an_average_joe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 days ago (5 children)

What if we do pay insurance and never get hit?

To me, both are not ideal. But somehow we as a society have accepted one as default and other as an extreme.

And the default one just happens to benefit the "shareholders" and not the everyday people.

(Btw the taxes we all pay could easily cover the costs of occasional accidents, and accidents could be reduced by proper regulations)

[–] atcorebcor@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

I mean thats the point, you are paying for reducing risk. If there is enough competition between insurers the average profit they make should be quite low.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (5 children)

I don't mind paying for auto insurance, but I also get more out than I pay :(

I probably pay in 5-6k before my car gets totaled and I get a payout higher than that before I start the process again.

Just once I want to be able to keep a car to the point where it's actually paid off .....

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 days ago

I love how you pay them thousands every year, and then when you want to use insurance, you have to pay them EVEN FUCKING MORE in excesses. Then, despite paying them thousands, they argue with you and try to not pay it. WHAT THE FUCK AM I EVEN PAYING FOR??

[–] Mangoholic@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

In Germany this is usually pretty well handled, you paid a bit more for full coverage and they cover all costs of repair etc. But if you're in lots of accidents each time your insurance cost rises. If you have little to no accidents for a few years, the insurance cost sinks. It is also mandetory for your vehicle to have insurance, avoiding sudden private insolvency.

[–] brotundspiele@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

To be clear, you need liability insurance for your vehicle, so if you cause harm to someone else their claims are covered. You don't need to have insurance for your own damages. The state doesn't really care about your solvency, only for the solvency of your potential victims.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

A lot of people can afford an insurance premium, and perhaps a deductible, but won't have enough for a $40,000 liability even if they saved for years.

What is suggested in this post is not much different from the past where poor people simply went on not having coverage and ended up in indentured servitude working off debts with manual labor like picking rocks. It's also just a thread away from Health Sharing Ministries, which is just a catastrophic failure whose nuance cannot be accurately depicted in a short comment.

load more comments
view more: next ›