Have we become used to or immune to mass shootings?

[henry quirk]

"No, it's the actual context."

No, that's Dana's conventional interpretation, fostered by official statements from providers, and the elected. It may actually spread the risk or allow it to be shared, but that's not the reason for it, just the coincidental byproduct.

But, it's an interpretation.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

"No, it's the actual context."

No, that's Dana's conventional interpretation, fostered by official statements from providers, and the elected. It may actually spread the risk or allow it to be shared, but that's not the reason for it, just the coincidental byproduct.

But, it's an interpretation.

Do you know the history of insurance? I do - and sharing the risk was the original purpose of insurance. The big bucks are the byproduct of that development.

You talk about your tolerance for risk. That's fine - it's up to you if you want to insure your risk. The mandatory nature of motor insurance is because of the third party element.

[limey]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Do you know the history of insurance? I do - and sharing the risk was the original purpose of insurance. The big bucks are the byproduct of that development.

She’s right you know. I studied the history of insurance, too. Lloyd’s coffee shop, the sharing of risk and the sharing of gain from the actual (seafaring) adventures ....




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[xoxoxoBruce]

Yeah, Loyd's is the granddaddy of insurance, but not the premise.
It started when primitive people started banding into groups/villages, one for all, all for one.

[Griff]

Those dirty commies...