I decided a while ago not to get into arguments on the Internets because it just isn't worth it.
>yes and no to a point. i always think that learning at an early age is imperative as its easy to learn young.
Yes, it is important to begin learning early. It's easier to learn when you oare young because it is easy to do many things when you are young. It is also easy to learn the wrong things when you are young.
After all, the same argument could be used for firearms and narcotics.
Similarly, markimak I don't think you could easily argue that your young friend is somehow also a quick learner - if he was, shouldn't he have been able to get into your car without smacking it into something? Shouldn't he have been able to better predict the results of stomping the accelerator? Shouldn't he have been able to think, "this is a weapon, and i don't own it. I must respect this or it could cost me."
In fact, it's this impetuousness that is at the heart of this issue: young people are much more likely to incorrectly assess and impound risk.
pretender, you don't need a sister working at the insurance firm to be listed as rating 1 - you can just call them up and tell them that that's what your rating is. They are happy to engage in such a deal on good faith. When the time comes to claim, however, their diligence process will reveal your true rating. From there, it's sayonara claim, sayonara paid premia, and sayonara sister's job. Possibly also sayonara future insurance.
>If he can't afford insurance each year, how the hell is he going to be able to afford a house loan?
This is the nature of disposable income. I won't pay $3,000 p.a. for insurance on a $20,000 asset, but I would have no problem repaying $3,000 a month on a $250,000 loan.
Finally, not all cars cost the same to insure - it's not just the value, the vehicle's age is also important.
Sorry for the rant.