🚀 go-pugleaf

In <merleDn36Bx.n4D@netcom.com> merle@netcom.com (Patrick Mrowcyznksi)
writes: 

>Does anyone know the percentage of uninsured drivers?

The numbers I've seen are broken down by zip code.  In some zip codes
the uninsured motorist rate is as high as 80%, some as low as 20%

>Is this the pay at the pump insurance initiative?  Whatever happened
to 
>that? 

It was dropped by the same folks now spearheading the nofault
initiative.

The theory behind "nofault" is not to pit insureds against the
uninsured, but to bring the uninsureds into the system - by lowering
the costs for them to buy insurance.

The insurance companies take in money and pay out money.  Their profits
are now capped at 10% I think.  They take in money in premium and pay
out in claims and overhead.  They pay out in claims 65-75% of what they
take in (they call this the loss ratio).  The idea is that if they
lower the claims cost, they could lower their premiums for everyone. 
OK claims costs: the theory for "no-fault" (backed by several good
studies) is - where does the claim money go - per studies: a very small
percentage goes to the individual actually in the accident to pay for
medical bills and to fix property.  The largest portion of the claim
dollars go for what I think is called "non-economic losses" namely
attorney fees.  So, in theory, by reforming the tort system so that
more of the claim dollar goes to the person actually in the accident,
this lowers the insurance company loss ratios - to be competitive, they
lower their rates - more folks in the past who couldn't afford auto
insurance now can.  Have I described the theory of "nofault" correctly?

Galen Hunter
http://www.hntr.com/paradigm/