Honda Car Forum

Matthew is on the right track, but there is another factor to consider.
In my case, adding comprehensive coverage to my junker car, for the sole
purpose of getting free windshield replacements would've cost about $200 a
year. Since a replacement windshield costs, I believe about $300-$400
dollars, then as long as I didn't need to replace the windshield more than
once every two years, I'd be better off without the insurance.
You have to look at how much you pay in, versus how much you could get out.
If over the short term you are paying in more than a potential claim payout,
then you shouldn't have that coverage. And if you can accept the loss
without significant hardship, then you shouldn't have the coverage.

--Peter


"Matthew Hunt" <mph@wopr.caltech.edu> wrote in message
news:bmjtek$2ah$1@naig.caltech.edu...
> In article <bmjdpv$ne1$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
> NetSock <NetSock@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course the "average" driver will pay more, but that's what its all
> > about...that's what "insurance" is. In case you haven't heard, insurance
> > companies make a profit.
>
> Uh, yeah, that's what I was explaining to you. How are those reading
> comprehension skills coming along?
>
> > My point was, anybody who doesn't carry insurance on a $5000.00
> > auto, is just plan stupid.
>
> No they aren't, if they can absorb the $5000 loss without great
> hardship. As I explained, you buy insurance to cover losses that you
> cannot absorb. If $5000 is a lot to you, then carry full insurance on
> your $5000 car. It's a lot of money to me, and I do carry insurance.
> But if Mr. Rich Guy has enough money that losing $5000 will have little
> effect on his quality of life, then he's better off not insuring his
> $5000 car.
>
> > Get it?
>
> Do you?
>
> Let's put it this way. You think it's stupid to not carry full insurance
> on a $5,000 car. What about a $1,000 car? A $250 car? If you have a
> deductible, it means you are willing to assume some of the financial risk
> yourself. So why is it OK for you to assume $250 or $500 worth of the
> risk, but stupid for someone richer than you to assume $5,000 of risk?