Quote Originally Posted by peggy View Post
Well, Alan, actually it's EXACTLY like this.
I know we'll disagree on this but no, it isn't exactly alike. Let's review a few comparisons.

The auto insurance comparison is flawed because the Individual Mandate tax (I think they're actually calling it a Shared Responsibility Tax now) hits people who refuseto participate in compulsory commerce. For a more accurate comparison, we’d have to implement a special tax penalty against people who refuse to purchase and drive a car. And if we did such a thing, what do you suppose would happen to the cost of auto insurance?
Which brings us to another huge reason this comparison is absurd: auto insurance is"insurance". It fits the functional definition of an insurance program: the buyer pays a modest amount, on a steady basis, to purchase financial protection against unanticipated, catastrophic expense. This protection is very affordable for safe drivers, because the insurance companies are permitted to measure risk against reward, and charge lower premiums for those deemed less likely to make expensive claims. A driver who gets into many accidents, and submits a high volume of claims, can expect to pay much higher premiums, as can people who fall into groups known to have a high level of risk, such as young men.

A wide range of options is offered to the buyer of an auto insurance policy, who is invited to shop around between many different providers to get the best deal. The buyer can accept higher levels of financial risk – larger deductibles, lower maximum payouts, and less comprehensive coverage – in exchange for lower premiums. The value and nature of the covered automobile, which was freely chosen by the driver, is also a strong factor in determining the price of coverage.

Auto insurance does notpay for routine vehicle maintenance, gasoline, or optional enhancements to the car. It is possible to purchase separate maintenance programs that provide such services at a discounted rate, in exchange for pre-payment, but no one thinks it would be a good idea to fold those maintenance plans into insurance policies.

So, in order to make them EXACTLY alike, we'd need to make everyone purchases automobile insurance, whether they owned or operated an automobile or not, ensure that everyone had exactly the same level of mandated coverage, and force a pricing structure to ensure that your neighbor down the street with two DUI convictions and a driving record consisting of several accidents resulting in serious bodily harm or death to bystanders paid no more than you who have not so much as a single speeding ticket on your record. Then, to top it off, we'd need to look at your neighbors income to determine how much you should contribute to the cost of his coverage.

Other than that, I guess you could say that they are EXACTLY alike, but I wouldn't.