"insurance premium tax"

[ResidingOnEarth]

I just got a letter from the company that insure my car.  They have given me a quote for another year of insurance.  Their quote included the following sentence:

Prices are inclusive of insurance premium tax, which has recently increased by over 50%.

Oh really?!  There's a thing called "insurance premium tax" which I have apparently already been paying for via artificially increased insurance rates... and also... it has just been arbitrarily increased!

 * shakes head in disbelief *

Amazing.  

So this is how it works: people in government decide they want more money to spend on things that they want. Those people in government then increase the amount of protection money they charge me (and the rest of us) so rather than me spend my money on what I want... they get to spend my money on what they want.

 

This is how people want their society to be run?

I will obviously being paying up because... it's not a request... it's a demand, backed by threat of extreme violence.  Also: they target all companies that provide car insurance so there likely isn't even an option which doesn't involve... [looks back down at the quote]... "insurance premium  tax".

I've tried to explain to the sheeple that support this stuff that they are supporting and advocating theft on a grand scale.  The sheeple invariably tell me (in an apparent attempt to rebut my claim) that "we need to be stolen from by the government because otherwise there would be chaos... and bad people would steal from us!"

They actually, usually say "we need to be taxed", but I've got used to silently converting "taxed" to "stolen from" in my head because I'm not aware of any functional difference between the two words and propaganda makes my head hurt.

They actually, also usually say "because there would be anarchy", but I've got used to silently converting "anarchy" to "chaos" in my head because it makes their insane statements just slightly less insane.  It provides me a slightly less painful cranial experience.

 

 

I guess this is just a rant.  Hope you don't mind.  I have literally no one in my life that understands and accepts this stuff.

[dsayers]

This is one of the many reasons why State-required auto insurance is extremely problematic even though every motorist being insured sounds great on paper.

 

They do this all over the place. In the US, once Obama-phones became a thing, working folks' cell phone bills had a new charge to pay for them.

 

All of this extreme racketeering just grows and grows. It's what makes me sick about people who point to it all and claim this is the product of a FREE market. Thankfully, it's becoming so large that even most State apologists are having a hard time standing behind it.

[wdiaz03]

...Meanwhile those motorists that do not care to obey the law, drive around without insurance. Quite common really. My friend was in an accident with an uninsured motorist. Damage to my friends car $2000. Since his car was worth about that much its a total lost. Other driver was driving a new pickup truck. Officer gave him a citation for expired tag and no insurance, and guy drove away. He has made no effort to pay for the damages and the only option is small claims court which is like $200 to file the case. Then good luck trying to collect.

 

Friend has been driving car as is for a few months now.

 

Win win. (for the government and the scums)

[dsayers]

Officer gave him a citation for expired tag and no insurance, and guy drove away. He has made no effort to pay for the damages

Last couple times I found myself in traffic court, I'd say about 90% of the cases were no license or no insurance. If you could provide either on the spot, they just fined you and moved along. If you couldn't, they rescheduled to give you time to provide it so that they could fin you and move along. It's about revenue, not safety. And some of that revenue goes to perpetuating this racket while some of it goes towards coming up with new ways to steal from people.

[ribuck]

In the UK, Insurance Premium Tax has just gone up from 6% to 9.5%.

 

For this reason, I self-insure for almost every risk. The main exception is motor vehicle third party, where one risks being caged if one doesn't purchase insurance.

 

In the short term, being self-insured might cause greater volatility to one's wealth. In the long-term, one can't lose. In addition to saving the Insurance Premium Tax, one also saves the insurance company's overheads (their marketing costs, their administration costs, and the costs to honest policyholders of the fraudulent claims of others). These savings accumulate, so in the long run one will be much better off.

[AccuTron]

...For this reason, I self-insure for almost every risk. ...

 

How do you do that?

[Kurtis]

In the UK, Insurance Premium Tax has just gone up from 6% to 9.5%.

 

For this reason, I self-insure for almost every risk. The main exception is motor vehicle third party, where one risks being caged if one doesn't purchase insurance.

 

In the short term, being self-insured might cause greater volatility to one's wealth. In the long-term, one can't lose. In addition to saving the Insurance Premium Tax, one also saves the insurance company's overheads (their marketing costs, their administration costs, and the costs to honest policyholders of the fraudulent claims of others). These savings accumulate, so in the long run one will be much better off.

 

 

Where I live that is illegal for motor vehicle insurance.  This insurance is mandatory and there is only one insurer, the state.  The state increases rates continuously, using the additional profit to help "balance" the budgets (as they do with other crown corporations here, another big one being the power company).

 

The rate reductions for good drivers is capped (reached that myself a decade ago) and because it's "universal" coverage I get to subsidize all the bad drivers and fraudsters.

 

 

Most people have animosity towards this state monopoly and yet when I discuss a desire for a free society, well, you all know how that tends to go.

[ResidingOnEarth]

For this reason, I self-insure for almost every risk.

 

How do you do that?

 

I second that question.

 

My guess is that you mean: put the money that you would have put into insurance, into a pot; and don't spend from that pot except if it's an emergency and you would have otherwise claimed against an insurance policy.

 

Also ribuck: if you live anywhere near Cambridge and fancy a coffee and a chat, pm me.  I'm hoping to meet some voluntaryists/libertarians at some point.  I'm still not convinced they exist outside of the Internet as I've never met one

[SamuelS]

My city recently added a line on the utility bill, "Capital Integration", its a fixed fee but accounts for between 20 and 35% of my bill. They had a nice full color printout explaining how they need this money to keep doing what they've been doing all along...all I could understand about the whole thing is they're integrating my capital right into their account.

[shirgall]

My city recently added a line on the utility bill, "Capital Integration", its a fixed fee but accounts for between 20 and 35% of my bill. They had a nice full color printout explaining how they need this money to keep doing what they've been doing all along...all I could understand about the whole thing is they're integrating my capital right into their account.

 

In Portland where this is done 3% of total revenue for utilities went to the "general fund" of the city, so they were bribed not to complain about it.

[J. D. Stembal]

It's so nice not driving.

[ribuck]

My guess is that you mean: put the money that you would have put into insurance, into a pot; and don't spend from that pot except if it's an emergency and you would have otherwise claimed against an insurance policy.

 

Exactly right.

 

Obviously in the early years there is a risk that the pot could "go negative", but in the long run you can't lose.

 

Now, the only thing that could send my pot negative is if my house burned down. But that's an incredibly rare event which I will deal with if it happens, and I have saved more than £5000 over the years in house insurance alone.

 

And, ResidingOnEarth, thanks for the invitation. I'm in north-west England. I don't tend to get to Cambridge often, but if I'm heading down that way I'll send you a message.

[ResidingOnEarth]

Exactly right.

 

Obviously in the early years there is a risk that the pot could "go negative", but in the long run you can't lose.

 

Now, the only thing that could send my pot negative is if my house burned down. But that's an incredibly rare event which I will deal with if it happens, and I have saved more than £5000 over the years in house insurance alone.

 

I like this idea.  I especially like the fact that it doesn't fund the state.  I may consider doing this myself.  If you don't mind saying: how do you preserve the value of your insurance savings?  Obviously GBP is deflationary.

 

I think if I lived somewhere where the healthcare system wasn't centrally run by the state, I'd likely at least get insurance to cover the really rare but terrible and expensive health problems.  As it stands though, I'm effectively already forced to pay for that insurance through the NHS.

[dsayers]

It's so nice not driving.

I once dated a girl who went to university in a college town. She didn't own a car at the time and was able to walk everywhere. Ever since I heard that story, I wished I could live without a car. They're SO expensive in a statist society. The State steals from me when I buy the car, says I have to license it, I have to be licensed, the car has to be insured, taxes every step of maintenance, steals from me at the pump, etc.

[J. D. Stembal]

I once dated a girl who went to university in a college town. She didn't own a car at the time and was able to walk everywhere. Ever since I heard that story, I wished I could live without a car. They're SO expensive in a statist society. The State steals from me when I buy the car, says I have to license it, I have to be licensed, the car has to be insured, taxes every step of maintenance, steals from me at the pump, etc.

 

I'm not going to frame it like a small lifestyle change when it isn't. Ditching the car and walking is probably the biggest and most difficult lifestyle change I have ever made after quitting drinking. Last night, I walked in single digit temperatures for about five miles, which I covered in about 70 minutes.

 

I hitchhike or reverse hitchhike, as in people offer me a ride. I'm certain that the people in my area think I'm a nut, but I don't care as long as I feel awesome and live a long and happy life. Statistically, I know I'm safer outside of the car than inside. There is a "free" county funded bus, which I can use if desired. If I want to go to Denver, a one way bus pass is $12.

 

The cost to buy, maintain, repair, insure and fuel a car is absolutely insane, and it's only going to get worse when the dollar begins to lose value on the FOREX. Some people take out seven year loans to own a car. What do you think that does to the price? People used to pay cash for cars.

 

 

[Kurtis]

I once dated a girl who went to university in a college town. She didn't own a car at the time and was able to walk everywhere. Ever since I heard that story, I wished I could live without a car. They're SO expensive in a statist society. The State steals from me when I buy the car, says I have to license it, I have to be licensed, the car has to be insured, taxes every step of maintenance, steals from me at the pump, etc.

 

Also here when you sell a used vehicle between people, you have to pay tax on that transfer of property.  This is enforceable because you have to insure the vehicle at the State insurance company, and the tax is collected there when filing the transfer papers.  

 

The State is pretty effective at finding middle points to swoop in and extract whatever they can, wherever they can.

[ribuck]

...how do you preserve the value of your insurance savings?  Obviously GBP is deflationary...

 

Almost all of my spare funds are invested in the stockmarket. This has two advantages:

 

1. In the long term, the UK stockmarket has grown at 5.1% (plus inflation) per year. By the time I factor in costs such as the sales tax on share transactions, and various holding and trading fees, I reckon on my savings increasing by 4% plus inflation per year. So for every £10,000 of shares I get about £400 per year of ongoing passive income.

 

2. The UK has a tax system that is heavily skewed towards the investor. If you earn £20,000 in wages in a year, you get approximately £10,000 tax-free and you pay tax on the remaining £10,000. But if you earn £10,000 in wages and another £10,000 in capital gains on your shares, the whole lot is tax-free (because there are separate tax-free thresholds for income and for capital gains tax, and you can stack them together). You can also transfer shares to your spouse so that they also get a £10,000 tax-free threshold, but you can't do the same with wages.