T Nation

A Way To Rebel


#1

What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?


#2

The stock market would resume its death spiral and the economy would tank. The world would soon follow. There would be no escaping the fall of the Great Satan. Yeah, I just wrote that. If you were pulled over in California and didn’t have insurance you would be fined $1,059 and probably have your vehicle impounded. It’s really silly to play “What if”

fin


#3

If you really want to rebel quit paying your taxes and quit voting.


#4

[quote]clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?[/quote]

Anarchy


#5

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?

Anarchy[/quote]

Well no, not necessarily – in fact quite the opposite in light of all the government intervention going on in the markets.

Think about it this way: If people quit using services provided by the private sector then those services will go away. That is all. If people quit paying their CC bills then CC services will go away…and for those people that want to use them they will have to PAY big time for it since prices are set by supply and demand.

However, if people were to quit supporting the government it would go away just the same and then we would have anarchy. BTW, if we quit supporting government these banks would not be able to get away with “price gouging” because customers would seek other services or just quit paying their bills altogether. As it is now, banks will get bailed out which just will incur the expense on the tax payers – which we can both agree is not anarchy.


#6

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?

Anarchy[/quote]

Anarchy … I don’t know what it is but I like it


#7

#8

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?

Anarchy

Well no, not necessarily – in fact quite the opposite in light of all the government intervention going on in the markets.

Think about it this way: If people quit using services provided by the private sector then those services will go away. That is all. If people quit paying their CC bills then CC services will go away…and for those people that want to use them they will have to PAY big time for it since prices are set by supply and demand.

However, if people were to quit supporting the government it would go away just the same and then we would have anarchy. BTW, if we quit supporting government these banks would not be able to get away with “price gouging” because customers would seek other services or just quit paying their bills altogether. As it is now, banks will get bailed out which just will incur the expense on the tax payers – which we can both agree is not anarchy.[/quote]

I am not saying that anarchy would have no upsides, I think the down side would be the strong would dominate , I know that goes cross ways to the dogma attached to anarchy , but I see no way around it.


#9

[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
The stock market would resume its death spiral and the economy would tank. The world would soon follow. There would be no escaping the fall of the Great Satan. Yeah, I just wrote that. If you were pulled over in California and didn’t have insurance you would be fined $1,059 and probably have your vehicle impounded. It’s really silly to play “What if”

fin[/quote]

I’m fine with insurance mandates.

Once you get hit by an illegal alien with no insurance you don’t understand that this is for the protection of all drivers who have the PRIVILAGE of driving by keeping current on reg, license and insurance.

You don’t know how many idiots drive without insurance. It’s like owning and using a lethal weapon without liability insurance.


#10

[quote]clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?[/quote]

crack cocaine.


#11

PAY MY RENT BITCH!

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?

crack cocaine.[/quote]


#12

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
I’m fine with insurance mandates.
[/quote]

Even if it means that those who would choose to get insurance anyway will have to pay a bigger premium? Making particular services mandatory just raises prices on people for those services. For example, we pay more for coverage and get less in terms of coverage.

It is illogical to think that when everyone has insurance people are more protected. What if instead of purchasing insurance I put that $100/month away into a savings account or invested it into a something productive. Wouldn’t that insure me just as much in the long run if I go 10 years accident free? That is $12K stashed away that I wouldn’t have otherwise had, not including any capital gains that might exist.

I see no need for everyone to have insurance. It is not the most productive choice for some of us; and besides it is unfair to make people have it especially since driving is NOT a privilege that should be provided by the state but rather a service that we should pay for in the market like anything else if we want to use it.


#13

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
clip11 wrote:
What if the american public stopped paying their credit card bills, refused to pay insurance premiums when they went past a certain point i.e. we refused to pay car insurance more than $200 a year? What if people stopped making house payments, Im not talking about one person, I mean if millions started doing it.

What would happen?

Anarchy

Well no, not necessarily – in fact quite the opposite in light of all the government intervention going on in the markets.

Think about it this way: If people quit using services provided by the private sector then those services will go away. That is all. If people quit paying their CC bills then CC services will go away…and for those people that want to use them they will have to PAY big time for it since prices are set by supply and demand.

However, if people were to quit supporting the government it would go away just the same and then we would have anarchy. BTW, if we quit supporting government these banks would not be able to get away with “price gouging” because customers would seek other services or just quit paying their bills altogether. As it is now, banks will get bailed out which just will incur the expense on the tax payers – which we can both agree is not anarchy.[/quote]

This is false. Government doesn’t really need taxes; that’s just an instrument of control. They can create any money they need electronically.

To REALLY rebel, citizens would have to refuse to interact in any way, not accepting anything in payment from the government (for foodstuffs, supplies, and the like). Then, the military would just take what’s needed.

Subsistance farm in an isolated area. Barter with neighbors but don’t create anything of value. Even then, the government might do a General Sherman and just strip the countryside and destroy/burn everything else.


#14

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
You don’t know how many idiots drive without insurance.
[/quote]

Ooh, ooh! Me! Me!

I don’t need auto insurance.


#15

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Growing_Boy wrote:
The stock market would resume its death spiral and the economy would tank. The world would soon follow. There would be no escaping the fall of the Great Satan. Yeah, I just wrote that. If you were pulled over in California and didn’t have insurance you would be fined $1,059 and probably have your vehicle impounded. It’s really silly to play “What if”

fin

I’m fine with insurance mandates.

Once you get hit by an illegal alien with no insurance you don’t understand that this is for the protection of all drivers who have the PRIVILAGE of driving by keeping current on reg, license and insurance.

You don’t know how many idiots drive without insurance. It’s like owning and using a lethal weapon without liability insurance.
[/quote]

This gas nothing to do with privileges but with illegitimate risk transfer.

The result is the same but the first idea implies that the government grants rights and the second only assumes that it does its job of protecting people.


#16

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
I’m fine with insurance mandates.

Even if it means that those who would choose to get insurance anyway will have to pay a bigger premium? Making particular services mandatory just raises prices on people for those services. For example, we pay more for coverage and get less in terms of coverage.

It is illogical to think that when everyone has insurance people are more protected. What if instead of purchasing insurance I put that $100/month away into a savings account or invested it into a something productive. Wouldn’t that insure me just as much in the long run if I go 10 years accident free? That is $12K stashed away that I wouldn’t have otherwise had, not including any capital gains that might exist.

I see no need for everyone to have insurance. It is not the most productive choice for some of us; and besides it is unfair to make people have it especially since driving is NOT a privilege that should be provided by the state but rather a service that we should pay for in the market like anything else if we want to use it.[/quote]

However if you operate a vehicle there is always the risk of an accident.

Since you might be dead or otherwise incapacitated in a way that makes it impossible to pay your obligations if you caused the accident, you take a risk in someone else’s name and that is definitely not ok, especially on a public road.

Mandatory insurance makes sure that you roughly pay according to the risk factor you are.

Was that not the case people would overuse the resource “road” even more.

The same argument can be made for drunk driving and pollution.


#17

[quote]malonetd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
You don’t know how many idiots drive without insurance.

Ooh, ooh! Me! Me!

I don’t need auto insurance.[/quote]

No, but your potential victims do.


#18

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Growing_Boy wrote:
The stock market would resume its death spiral and the economy would tank. The world would soon follow. There would be no escaping the fall of the Great Satan. Yeah, I just wrote that. If you were pulled over in California and didn’t have insurance you would be fined $1,059 and probably have your vehicle impounded. It’s really silly to play “What if”

fin

I’m fine with insurance mandates.

Once you get hit by an illegal alien with no insurance you don’t understand that this is for the protection of all drivers who have the PRIVILAGE of driving by keeping current on reg, license and insurance.

You don’t know how many idiots drive without insurance. It’s like owning and using a lethal weapon without liability insurance.
[/quote]

Story time! Yeah I once got hit by an “illegal” his insurance paid for everything. Even got me a rental car. Nice guy really, I bought him a couple beers that weekend. That’s back in the day when I had my Civics and my Rex. He backed up his F250 into Civic and he waited around till I came back from Costco, apologized gave me his insurance company’s info and after 4 days they fixed my car. He was scared thinking that I was going to lynch and kill his family and throw their burned remains over the border. NOPE, now on the other side of the spectrum. I had some pretty, rich bitch, with the horrible fake tan ram the Lexus her daddy bought her into the rear passenger side door of my Super Duty. I was standing there looking at her the whole time. She only had liability and wanted to pretend like there was no damage done to my rig and drive away. I mean my rig is 5 years old and its been a work truck but I as sure as shit dont like getting dings and dents in her. I called CHP, I called (insert city name) PD because she became belligerent and feared for my well being. There was a Charger (insert Nelson’s laugh from The Simpsons, poor boys got handed a shit sucking pursuit vehicle) CHiPee, a moto CHiPee and two PD patrol cars on site within minutes. For once the cops were on my side. I told them how it went down and they pretty much nailed her to the wall. Her dad showed up and I had the bastard cover my damages and some. Funny, I’ve had the best vehicular experiences with “illegals” than with people that are enabled by the system to play by the rules. As for being okay with insurance mandates, sure but I’m paying 189.95 a month and thats with the that motherfucking cheeky cunt of a Gecko. They nickel and dime me everytime something happens and I need there asses to help me out. I say fuck em.

/story time


#19

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
I’m fine with insurance mandates.

Even if it means that those who would choose to get insurance anyway will have to pay a bigger premium? Making particular services mandatory just raises prices on people for those services. For example, we pay more for coverage and get less in terms of coverage.

It is illogical to think that when everyone has insurance people are more protected. What if instead of purchasing insurance I put that $100/month away into a savings account or invested it into a something productive. Wouldn’t that insure me just as much in the long run if I go 10 years accident free? That is $12K stashed away that I wouldn’t have otherwise had, not including any capital gains that might exist.

I see no need for everyone to have insurance. It is not the most productive choice for some of us; and besides it is unfair to make people have it especially since driving is NOT a privilege that should be provided by the state but rather a service that we should pay for in the market like anything else if we want to use it.[/quote]

Vehicles are lethal weapons and not just any idiot should be able to drive, therefore we have tests. That is the privelage to me. You are permitted to use it only after proving worth.

However the hell batshit crazy teens and people who can’t read our road signs who drive better fucking have insurance when they plow into me! I should not have to claim that on my insurance.


#20

[quote]orion wrote:
Was that not the case people would overuse the resource “road” even more.

[/quote]

But this is a completely different argument. Government steals our money so that leaches can over use a service and then the government forces us to insure ourselves so that these same leeches can be protected?

And it still does not change the fact that making something mandatory reduces the quality of service we will receive. Besides that, I can save my own money and someone CAN sue my estate in the event of my death – the same process they would have to go through with my insurance agency anyway.