Nice try but even a death carriers financial impact to those left behind. These “financial impact” arguments cannot be defeated as a case can be made from any situation. As for being on your “dime”, I presume you mean the insurance risk pool to which you belong but there are an infinite number of other scenarios that could be dreamed up to make you feel personally victimized.
Your response makes very little sense Tom. If you have an accident not wearing a helmet in Michigan, you get unlimited medical for life. That’s my dime since I am in Michigan. The biggest reason rates are high here is that this “pool” exists. No other state has unlimited benefits. You run off the road and crack your thick head. If it takes $10,000,000 to perform multiple surgeries and to take care of your drooling self the rest of your life, we in Michigan get to pay for your lack of sense for how ever long you live. How do you see this as right? My helmet saved my life years ago. Without it I would have been a drooling idiot, or a liberal.
The entire state of Michigan is infected with union mentality of give-a-ways. That approach has destroyed the American auto industry and the State of Michigan that had too many eggs in the UAW basket. I recall one year when the UAW contracts were up that they had trouble coming up with something additional to demand. One year it was a free computer for all it’s un-educated and un-skilled workers. Another time it was access to free legal advice. On top of a fixed time workweek and a ridiculously generous retirement plan including lifetime medical, it was only a matter of time until the bubble burst. Did you know that the price of a new Ford includes an average of $4,400 to fund Union employees retirement benefits? You reap what you sow.
Anejo: That’s one way to look at it! The expense of that, in addition to closed head injuries, is just incredible……and I could understand it if it were my fault…but to collect off my auto policy when I’m ZERO percent to blame???? OMG!!!!!!!
I would imagine that you woould feel much better if the injury was not related to a TBI; say, quadraplegia, or loss of limbs from an accident. These type of accidents also cost money. Maybe banning motorcyles all together, then reducing the speed limit to under 30 MPH, then limiting the intake of soda for a family, then limiting a person’s Body Mass Index etc. etc. etc. My point is that claiming that it costs you money is playing into political victimology which leads to control of your fellow citizens lives and activities.
Tom: Not sure of your thought process on this……it costs each and every policyholder in the State money. Our rates are based upon our own insurance company paying the first $450,000 of any medical claim, plus 3 years Loss of Wages). In addition, we all pay into the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Assessment, which is the Unlimited Lifetime Medical Coverage……I’m no fan of “big brother” either, but at the same time, they dictate we have to wear seat belts don’t they???
Having trouble following this one… “…if more bikers have accidents and medical bills are more costly because they are not wearing helmets, whose fault will it be, not the auto policy holder! but the bikers,…”
If the bikers are not policy holders, how would they be responsible for increased premiums? Are they not the same thing?
ok, first of all in MICHIGAN and no other state, is a true-no-fault state. this means exactly that – not matter who’s at-fault your own insurance is covering that medical bill. well, that means the motorcycle driver’s own policy is covering his medical bill. now if he’s at-fault, his premium will rise! now, there is not enough to pool from his area, it will cause the rates to increase in his area. if more bikers have accidents and medical bills are more costly because they are not wearing helmets, whose fault will it be, not the auto policy holder! but the bikers, now behold, if you go to another state, then the at-fault driver will be paying, but that won’t be an unlimited funding. so who loses out? the biker because he did not wear his helmet!
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Gee Tom, I guess then it’s ok to have unlimited lifetime medical on my dime for your stupid decisions. Your name apparently is correct.
Nice try but even a death carriers financial impact to those left behind. These “financial impact” arguments cannot be defeated as a case can be made from any situation. As for being on your “dime”, I presume you mean the insurance risk pool to which you belong but there are an infinite number of other scenarios that could be dreamed up to make you feel personally victimized.
Your response makes very little sense Tom. If you have an accident not wearing a helmet in Michigan, you get unlimited medical for life. That’s my dime since I am in Michigan. The biggest reason rates are high here is that this “pool” exists. No other state has unlimited benefits. You run off the road and crack your thick head. If it takes $10,000,000 to perform multiple surgeries and to take care of your drooling self the rest of your life, we in Michigan get to pay for your lack of sense for how ever long you live. How do you see this as right? My helmet saved my life years ago. Without it I would have been a drooling idiot, or a liberal.
The entire state of Michigan is infected with union mentality of give-a-ways. That approach has destroyed the American auto industry and the State of Michigan that had too many eggs in the UAW basket. I recall one year when the UAW contracts were up that they had trouble coming up with something additional to demand. One year it was a free computer for all it’s un-educated and un-skilled workers. Another time it was access to free legal advice. On top of a fixed time workweek and a ridiculously generous retirement plan including lifetime medical, it was only a matter of time until the bubble burst. Did you know that the price of a new Ford includes an average of $4,400 to fund Union employees retirement benefits? You reap what you sow.
Anejo: That’s one way to look at it! The expense of that, in addition to closed head injuries, is just incredible……and I could understand it if it were my fault…but to collect off my auto policy when I’m ZERO percent to blame???? OMG!!!!!!!
I would imagine that you woould feel much better if the injury was not related to a TBI; say, quadraplegia, or loss of limbs from an accident. These type of accidents also cost money. Maybe banning motorcyles all together, then reducing the speed limit to under 30 MPH, then limiting the intake of soda for a family, then limiting a person’s Body Mass Index etc. etc. etc. My point is that claiming that it costs you money is playing into political victimology which leads to control of your fellow citizens lives and activities.
Tom: Not sure of your thought process on this……it costs each and every policyholder in the State money. Our rates are based upon our own insurance company paying the first $450,000 of any medical claim, plus 3 years Loss of Wages). In addition, we all pay into the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Assessment, which is the Unlimited Lifetime Medical Coverage……I’m no fan of “big brother” either, but at the same time, they dictate we have to wear seat belts don’t they???
Jon, my points basically is that the fewer the laws that use group costs to control individuals, the better.
Having trouble following this one… “…if more bikers have accidents and medical bills are more costly because they are not wearing helmets, whose fault will it be, not the auto policy holder! but the bikers,…”
If the bikers are not policy holders, how would they be responsible for increased premiums? Are they not the same thing?
ok, first of all in MICHIGAN and no other state, is a true-no-fault state. this means exactly that – not matter who’s at-fault your own insurance is covering that medical bill. well, that means the motorcycle driver’s own policy is covering his medical bill. now if he’s at-fault, his premium will rise! now, there is not enough to pool from his area, it will cause the rates to increase in his area. if more bikers have accidents and medical bills are more costly because they are not wearing helmets, whose fault will it be, not the auto policy holder! but the bikers, now behold, if you go to another state, then the at-fault driver will be paying, but that won’t be an unlimited funding. so who loses out? the biker because he did not wear his helmet!