Quote:
Originally Posted by MTUpower
I never liked those suggestions that advocated the abolition of something without a solution that might work in it's absence. We can all think of things that don't work properly according to ourselves, but as the saying goes- got a better idea?
I many times categorize people into two groups: the "my idea" people and "the idea" people.
"The idea" people take a common solution and ask how to make it better. If you change "the idea", and make "the idea" better- you keep it, and "the idea" morphs into the latest positive change. It matters little if you or someone else came up with the change.
"My idea" people want to solve a problem with an answer they themselves came up with regardless if that solution is better or worse than the previous "idea".
You don't like insurance and money? What are people on this planet going to use in it's place?
As I'm sure you heard- it's a horrible system with glaring issues and it's the worst we have seen- except for every other system.
|
How are you going to hone what you have w/o noting what isn't working? As for what are people going to use in place of insurance, that's a big point of the book, that people prior to modern insurance (and currently with small groups like the Amish) relied on each other to pull through calamities, in a more personal way. It had it's problems too no doubt but supporting a large industry of people just to administer the book-keeping of our current system is a sort of drain of resources, IMO.
Too many people getting filthy rich in the insurance biz while jumping through hoops to deny claims. I mean, often, they're very good with claims, I've had no trouble but I've read plenty of horror stories. And how and why did Warren Buffett get so rich off of insurance and Coke? Both are somewhat worthless.
Insurance: betting against yourself.