It’s the same if I’d total the car driving drunk or similar behaviors. They have comprehensive insurance but that doesn’t cover reckless behavior so the risk is there already that they need to recover money from their members.
It’s a huge co-op - 30.000 drivers, 1.600 cars, close to 30 years experience. They can probably calculate the risks accordingly.
@FanCityKnits
This may be true for this co-op, but not for smaller ones. And I’m pretty sure that they can have insurance that compensates reckless behaviour by a third party and then tries to recover the cost there.
Anyway, I still see a big difference if the cost comes from direct action of the member or from the government inflicting costs to a non-perpetrator. Fascist policies seem to be en vogue. @giggls@TDCN@Showroom7561
It’s the action of the member that inflicts the cost.
Whether they total the car driving drunk or get it confiscated because of reckless driving - the car is gone. Reckless behavior has consequences and they are known up front.
“If you get drunk and drive we’ll kill your firstborn. No it wasn’t the government who killed the child, it was your action.” That’s *structurally* the same, and it is wrong.
And yes, reckless behaviour as in criminally risking the live of others should have severe consequences. But not for some co-op, the employer, other family members, friends, and so on. Collective punishment is a fascist idea, full stop. @giggls@TDCN@Showroom7561
@jnfingerle @giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
It’s the same if I’d total the car driving drunk or similar behaviors. They have comprehensive insurance but that doesn’t cover reckless behavior so the risk is there already that they need to recover money from their members.
It’s a huge co-op - 30.000 drivers, 1.600 cars, close to 30 years experience. They can probably calculate the risks accordingly.
@FanCityKnits
This may be true for this co-op, but not for smaller ones. And I’m pretty sure that they can have insurance that compensates reckless behaviour by a third party and then tries to recover the cost there.
Anyway, I still see a big difference if the cost comes from direct action of the member or from the government inflicting costs to a non-perpetrator. Fascist policies seem to be en vogue.
@giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
@jnfingerle @giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
It’s the action of the member that inflicts the cost.
Whether they total the car driving drunk or get it confiscated because of reckless driving - the car is gone. Reckless behavior has consequences and they are known up front.
@FanCityKnits
This isn’t true, and you know it.
“If you get drunk and drive we’ll kill your firstborn. No it wasn’t the government who killed the child, it was your action.” That’s *structurally* the same, and it is wrong.
And yes, reckless behaviour as in criminally risking the live of others should have severe consequences. But not for some co-op, the employer, other family members, friends, and so on. Collective punishment is a fascist idea, full stop.
@giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
@jnfingerle @giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
Hyperbole some?
@FanCityKnits
Not at all. Thanks for asking.
@giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
@jnfingerle @giggls @TDCN @Showroom7561
We’ll have to agree to disagree here.