<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: APPLES, KUMQUATS, AND AUTO INSURANCE</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redstate.com/daconia/2009/11/16/apples-kumquats-and-auto-insurance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redstate.com/daconia/2009/11/16/apples-kumquats-and-auto-insurance/</link>
	<description>Just another RedState: Conservative News and Community weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:14:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: baserunr</title>
		<link>http://www.redstate.com/daconia/2009/11/16/apples-kumquats-and-auto-insurance/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>baserunr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redstate.com/daconia/?p=52#comment-56</guid>
		<description>and a functioning market would satisfy that need.  One of the problems is that &quot;insurance&quot; has now come to mean &quot;completely paid for by someone else&quot;.  Insurance is best suited to cover the costs of unlikely events, where the costs of those events are likely to be ruinous.  Even falling and breaking your arm is not such an event, and applying &quot;insurance&quot; for events such as this, and lesser ones, corrupts the user and bankrupts the payer.
States have rights to require auto insurance.  But if I have no car, I do not need insurance.  If I have no income, I owe no tax.  If I own no property, I have no liability for property tax.  Yet the liberals tell us that it is their intent to tax you for WHAT YOU DO NOT HAVE.  This is done in the name of fairness!  As I read the Constitution, the Federal Government has no such authority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and a functioning market would satisfy that need.  One of the problems is that &#8220;insurance&#8221; has now come to mean &#8220;completely paid for by someone else&#8221;.  Insurance is best suited to cover the costs of unlikely events, where the costs of those events are likely to be ruinous.  Even falling and breaking your arm is not such an event, and applying &#8220;insurance&#8221; for events such as this, and lesser ones, corrupts the user and bankrupts the payer.<br />
States have rights to require auto insurance.  But if I have no car, I do not need insurance.  If I have no income, I owe no tax.  If I own no property, I have no liability for property tax.  Yet the liberals tell us that it is their intent to tax you for WHAT YOU DO NOT HAVE.  This is done in the name of fairness!  As I read the Constitution, the Federal Government has no such authority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lycurgus</title>
		<link>http://www.redstate.com/daconia/2009/11/16/apples-kumquats-and-auto-insurance/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>lycurgus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:57:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redstate.com/daconia/?p=52#comment-55</guid>
		<description>there would be no insurance... the sooner we realize this the better

if you can&#039;t be prepared for something via your own income or savings, then that&#039;s tough for you

Marxism=death</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>there would be no insurance&#8230; the sooner we realize this the better</p>
<p>if you can&#8217;t be prepared for something via your own income or savings, then that&#8217;s tough for you</p>
<p>Marxism=death</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

