Tomorrow, rate hikes will consume the entire discount and without the discount will be barely affordable at all

Do you have examples from history to back up this prediction?

The day after, the rate penalty for not using the device will be unaffordable to most motorists

There are already insurance penalties for certain kinds of cars — such as those with very powerful engines. People are still buying them — willing to pay extra. Others buy the cars designed to fit just under the limit.

Your predictions are too gloomy.. As long as auto-insurance companies compete with each other and sell directly to car-owners (rather than through employers), we are fine...

It would result in a miserable micromanaged society.

Why? You aren't told not to eat ice-cream... You are just discouraged from it. So, why are you cursing?

But you know, it's okay because they get a discount and it's not the government doing it (*eyeroll*).

As long as it is not compulsory (which it would be, if government did it), it really may be Ok — for some people.

then I realize that the rest of us will get dinged for NOT opting-in, so damnit, stop that you idiots!

Then the rates will be slightly higher for all — with people willing to trade privacy for a discount subsidizing those like you (and me), who are not. Why do you think, such an outcome it is fair or desirable?

Of course, so do "conservatives" in the US these days.

Other than abortions, I can't think of a freedom, Conservatives are try to remove. And even that one comes from a (mistaken but sincere) belief, that fetus is a human being no less worthy of the State's protection from killing than any other citizen — a respectable opinion, even if you disagree with it.

And even if Conservatives prevail and manage to outlaw abortions, I'll be able to pay for a trip to Canada, should my daughter ever needs the procedure. But, if obamas are allowed to continue ravaging the country, in 10 more years we'll all be so poor, having a free abortion clinic next door will be of little consolation.

If I am hit by your acquaintance while they are giving you that free lift, their private insurance will cover my medical bills for as long as needed.

No, actually. Auto insurance policies have caps on them — $1mln is very common for private cars. Rich people are encouraged to pay for additional coverage (so as not to loose their house to a litigious victim), but it is not mandatory.

If I am hit by an Uber driver, well who knows how much insurance they have

The "who knows" argument — also known as spreading FUD ...

Uber covers them for $1Million

Yep, that same $1 million....

there is no guarantee that when you get into that Uber car you are actually insured at all.

Nor is your acquaintance guaranteeing you, his insurance has not been canceled last week...

Oh for fuck's sake, what does liberal have to do with communism?

Modern American Illiberals advocate bigger government role in the citizenry's every day lives. The bigger government needs higher taxes to support it, so, of course, taxes go up and up. Socialism/Communism aren't a binary (yes or no), they are gradual and can be measured — the measure is the percentage of GDP, that comes from spending by the government. Between Federal, State, and local governments nation-wide today, our percentage already exceeds 50%. Which means, the fate of over half of the monies spent by Americans is decided not by themselves, but by the politicians they elect.

That is Socialism creeping up, which I refer to as Communism-lite and its proponents, who defile the proud name of Liberals by their invalid claims to the name — commies-lite. But the differences between Socialism and Communism are slight — indeed, per Karl Marx himself, the former leads to the latter — they are both Collectivist regimes, emphasizing the (Glorious) Collective over a (greedy) Individual. "It takes a village" — right?

Are you trying to convince anyone that Stalin was a liberal?

Oh, it all changes, once the "liberal" gets to actual power. As Lenin was explaining in his writing, for example, "we use bourgeois's freedom of press to further our cause, but, once we prevail, the freedom should be curtailed". Look at Obama — NSA's roles expanding, TSA ever more obnoxious, IRS is used to suppress opposition, while Capitalism is being sabotaged by regulations and politically-motivated prosecutions. That he is not using the outright violence of Stalin, is because his country — and its traditions — aren't Russia-like...

But let's not get hung-up on Stalin, who (along with Hitler — another Collectivist), got so much negative press, that speaking fondly of them arouses nothing by (well-deserved) ridicule. How about Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez? Both are idols to American Illiberals — even though they turned their respective countries into shitholes. And Che Guevara — every Illiberal has a T-shirt with his likeness in their closet.

Here is a quiz for you — can your recognize the person behind each quote?

NO ONE GIVES A DAMN ABOUT YOU. YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A TEMPORARY INCONVENIENCE TO THE RICH ELITE

I know, I know. It is time to expropriate the unearned wealth of the rich and redistribute it among the (obviously more deserving) masses — both toiling and idle alike.

Only it has been tried before...

SEE YOU ALL IN HELL

Well, there is a chance, I'll see you earlier — on the 18th floor... Be sure to have your /. monicker showing on your nametag, when serving cappuccinos, isoTaime...

They served vastly different regimes. Mitrokhin betrayed Communists — followers of the deadliest school of thought known to humanity so far (even Hitler's peculiar brand of Fascism was but a distant second). Wherever Communism is attempted in earnest — USSR, North Korea, Cuba, Cambodia — the result is always mass-murder followed by economic misery and total absence of the human rights for the survivors.

Snowden betrayed America. Whatever problems — genuine and imaginary — you may have with the USA, USSR (and modern Russia) are far worse.

That's the difference — even if the actual betrayals are similar. But all of this is empty rhetoric for people, who sincerely equate Joseph McCarthy with Lavrenty Beria, so I'm not holding much hope here...

If everyone loses their jobs, who will be able to buy the products?

If nobody can find work, that means, there is no work to do. Which is just awesome, if that's because robots are doing everything. The means of production will, finally, be able to satisfy all demand...

If the car that crippled you was operated by an employee of a cab company, it might mean that a legal settlement would be reached such that you'd spend the rest of your life at your house with inhouse nurse care.

And it would be even better, if the taxis are all government-owned — in which case you'll get a truly gold-plated care, will you not? Heck, some of the poor may choose to stand on busy intersections just for that reason — would not that be terrific?

Do I hear a proposal to nationalize all transportation? And, better yet, all other corporations? Bigger is better, is not it?

Insurance rates are based on risk. Are you claiming that a car that is on the road all day long

A car may be on the road all day long for many different reasons. It makes sense for annual mileage to affect the cost of insurance — indeed, it is already factored in usually.

Singling out "commercial use" does not make sense.

The amount of insurance carried by Uber drivers is also probably much less than NY taxis.

If this fact does not bother you, when you are getting a free ride from an acquaintance, it should not bother you, when you are riding Uber(X).

And if it still bothers you anyway, well, just hail an "official" cab.

Which means the answer is not banning abortion, but banning the racism that leads to the financial inequity.

"Banning racism"... That's a good one. You can't ban thoughts — not yet, anyway. At most, you can prohibit some manifestations of those thoughts...

More importantly, though, racism is not the reason. Oh, it does exist, but that's not the reason for the Blacks' poverty. You see, Asians are targets of racism too — in America. Jews were targets of racism in Europe for centuries — and remain in certain places. Yet, neither of those two groups are worse off, on average, than the surrounding population at large. In fact, they tend to be better off — despite the racism.

I don't know, what the actual reason's are — may be, it is all of the condescending efforts to "help" Blacks (such as via affirmative action), that are holding them down. I am not sure. But racism is not it.

Sure, they make you swear to tell the truth, but actually doing so is usually not so great an idea.

Well, now that you've posted your incendiary speech on a public forum, you may as well repeat it in court. Or do you believe in that "Anonymous" nonsense? Of course not...