LogFAQs > #927908978

Dreaming_King posted...

Aaantlion posted...

If you have $30k in damages and the person only has $5k or $10 in assets, the fact that you're getting everything they have is still going to leave you in the hole.

That was mentioned in the OP. Why not just have them work off the balance in a government run detention work facility? The government pays the balance up front for the other person and then makes the money back with interest from the person responsible.

Because that's both impractical and, at the moment, explicitly unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment. And in the case of large debts, it also means that taxpayers are on the hook for a substantial amount of money that many individuals may not be able to cover through their slave labor in their remaining lifespan. And again, there's an easier solution: If you don't want the insurance, don't fucking buy the goods or services that necessitate it. There are very few things where it's mandatory, everywhere else it's just common sense.

VeeVees posted...

Why am I paying for firefighters to save other people's burning house? Why am I paying for cops to investigate other people murdering other people? Why am I paying for maintenance on roads I never use? Why am I paying for subsidies to farmers growing vegetables I don't eat? Everything should be pay per use.

Pay-per-use is impractical, it would really need to be more of a subscription model (with the exception of toll roads). And the only issue with firefighting is that a blaze at one location can affect neighboring structures.

And, tbh, paying for firefighting in principle wouldn't be much different than paying for other kinds of insurance.

Yellow posted...

That's called Libertarianism, and it's a joke.

All civilized societies have taxes.

Even libertarianism can have taxes. More importantly, libertarianism would likely work no worse than anything we have now.
---

(\/)(\/)|-|