In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:01:50 -0600,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>In article .com>, wrote:
>>> 1.Why do I have to pay seperate liability for each car, when all i can
>>> do is wreck one at a time? Anyone have one good reason other than
>>> insurance companies making more money?
>>
>>I've always thought this to be ass-backwards as well. We really should
>>insure drivers for liability, not vehicles.
>
> If we did it that way, then every licensed driver would be required to
> carry insurance, even if they do not own a car and choose not to
> drive. After all, you might rent or borrow a car at any time.

That would be their problem. Why should I pay the insurance for someone
else renting a car? Why should I pay insurance for someone who will never
drive my cars? If someone not on my policy without their own
insurance wrecks my car, the claim will likely be denied anyway the way
things seem to work.