darxus: (Default)
darxus ([personal profile] darxus) wrote2009-09-17 06:09 pm

(no subject)

Why do most people still live in houses that could burn down, or be broken into with no more effort than breaking a thin sheet of glass?

[identity profile] benndragon.livejournal.com 2009-09-17 11:23 pm (UTC)(link)
OTOH, the statistical likelihood of my house in particular being broken into is really low. Same for burning down, come to think of it. Maybe we've actually found a case where humans are capable of overcoming the tendency to blow random acts of bad shit entirely out of proportion to their likelihood of happening to them!

[identity profile] darxus.livejournal.com 2009-09-18 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think so. People still pay for insurance against these things, and insurance must, on average, be a losing gamble. I think the money spent on insurance against these kinds of problems would be better spent physically preventing them.

[identity profile] mclazarus.livejournal.com 2009-09-24 04:30 am (UTC)(link)
Insurance is a requirement of my mortgage, since I can't afford to outright buy the home I want the person lending me the money gets to set certain terms, therefore I've never considered not having it.

Although often the home insurance packages bundle several services including falling limbs, theft, fire, burst pipes, and protection against someone else being injured on your property, or having their property damaged, i.e. your tree falls on their car.

The reason I am generally unconcerned with break-in is that I believe it to be a fairly marginal issue. I think if you looked at all the statistics available from police or insurance companies, while it can vary wildly I'd guess home intrusion is typically very very infrequent. And while people have free will, statistics being simply a measurement of ignorance, lacking evidence of violent enemies I'm not worried.