Quote from: FirstAscent on March 21, 2013, 07:50:55 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on March 21, 2013, 07:46:27 PM

Quote from: FirstAscent on March 21, 2013, 07:38:35 PM

Quote from: myrkul on March 21, 2013, 07:18:04 PM

No, it doesn't. However, having that liability settled does.

No. It doesn't. You can't get blood from a stone. You're fucking stupid.

You're essentially saying that society is the group that must pay in the event of one person's lack of personal responsibility affecting another person. I disagree. I say that people should acquire insurance on their own free will that would protect them from the lack of personal responsibility of others.

A great example of this is called "Uninsured Motorist" coverage.

Granted, one could certainly argue that the cost of this insurance would go up quite readily in the absence of a requirement to have motorist insurance, but at least people would have the freedom to choose what risks they want to take in that regard.

Also, bankruptcy is a cop out. If you owe someone money, you pay it, even if it takes the rest of your life to do so.

Insurance is society paying. Best to make uninsured motorist coverage mandatory if insurance isn't.

You're arguing that people should do this and that, without understanding the true meaning and context of 'should'.

Insurance is society paying BY CHOICE. Nothing needs to be mandatory. If a person can't pay their medical bills, they don't get served by the medical community. They can turn to charity and other help groups if they like, at that point.