How to evaluate the couple in "Mr. and Mrs. China rode around the world and were seriously injured in the United States"?

Evaluation of the parties: situational utilitarians with weak insurance awareness and conformity psychology.

Evaluation of this matter: the risk of traffic accidents is endogenous to modern transportation itself, and the government should recognize some of the costs.

At first, I just expressed anger at the rogue behavior of the parties, but I always felt that something was wrong. Later, it dawned on me that they were hit on the road and were not injured when crossing the wild mountain. The other party is "poor", but at least the car they drive should have strong insurance, right? Later, I watched the news carefully, and it did exist, but the amount was a little low, 1 ten thousand dollars. This is normal. I checked the compulsory insurance in our country and only paid 10 thousand yuan. And three types of voluntary liability insurance (yes, these two types are different now, but there were only three types of liability insurance), with coverage ranging from 50,000 to10 million.

This gave us a wake-up call. Out of the attitude of being responsible for yourself, it is best to buy a three-liability insurance when buying a car, otherwise you will have to pay for your own property if something goes wrong; It is also out of a responsible attitude towards yourself that you should buy accident insurance for yourself when you are engaged in outdoor sports.

This is the case with the driver, but the driver's insurance is not enough to pay for it. You can find the driver himself. The other situation is even more worrying. What if the driver can't catch it? Isn't that bad luck? Modern society is modern because we should not let unlucky people admit that they are unlucky. I know a friend of Les. When she was 14 years old, her father had a car accident and the perpetrator escaped. After that, her family collapsed and she had to drop out of school to work. This is too scary. Of course, she is married to a good man now, and she has a good life with the demolition money.

Then I remembered, in fact, this issue was discussed on the Internet many years ago, and finally such a document "Trial Measures for the Management of Social Assistance Funds for Road Traffic Accidents" was discussed, including this one:

Article 12

Under any of the following circumstances, the relief fund shall advance the funeral expenses and part or all of the rescue expenses of the victims of road traffic accidents:

(a) the cost of rescue exceeds the limit of compulsory insurance liability;

(two) the motor vehicle did not participate in compulsory insurance;

(3) A motor vehicle escapes after an accident.

It looks good, but there is still a problem. How should we treat the parties who commit such acts in this case? This involves an insurance term called moral hazard. Refers to the tendency of the insured to change his daily behavior after receiving insurance protection. In layman's terms, if something happens to a person, he will be particularly willful and reduce his efforts to protect himself. This question is more helpful to understand: since sentries are always broken by assassins, is there a special device to fix their necks? -Cold knowledge

This is also the reason why liberals oppose overprotection. Although I am a leftist and an extreme socialist, I still quite agree with liberalism in some things, such as migrant workers asking for wages. I think the government can't violate procedural justice and ask migrant workers to pay wages, which can only encourage the society not to sign labor contracts. It is better to let people suffer now, but also to learn from others and force out a rule of law order. Moreover, moral hazard has another meaning, that is, touching porcelain to cheat insurance. Now, the underworld has also begun to pretend to be migrant workers.

The United States is a liberal country (see: Why do China people look for reasons from themselves, while Americans look for reasons from social systems and government systems? China people), the solution to moral hazard is that the government does not care. Have time to look at Netease's follow-up reports. On the other hand, the couple were hit by bicycles and had no money to cure them. American good people did it in the end, and said that good people did it for a long time. Finally, he said that he could pay by installment. To sum up, it is still two words-no matter.

What about China? The government is in charge, but it needs the application of the parties and the examination and approval of the specific circumstances. According to the laws of our country, there is no compensation for running to the expressway like this, not a penny. I'm not saying that China is stronger than the United States. Not good at all! Because this law has been implemented for five years, how do you approve it? Where is the standard? None of them. The accumulated balance of Guangdong Provincial Fund is 2 billion, which was distributed to 200,000 last year: How to let more people know about the social assistance fund for traffic accidents?

According to the above news, many people don't know about it, I believe, because many legal persons in our country just don't know. Speaking of which, I remember when I talked with civil servants in the labor department, they hated public knowledge and their roots itched. Why? First of all, they are civil servants, and their butts decide their heads; Secondly, we all know what is said online. The society is dark, the labor law is useless, there is no need to sign a contract for work, and there is no need to pay attention to collecting evidence. It doesn't matter if you go to the labor bureau anyway.

But if something really goes wrong, you still have to find the labor bureau. Every day, I can see people who come to the labor bureau with a "try it" mentality. There is really no evidence. Is it really useless without evidence? As a result, he felt that the labor bureau was embarrassing him by asking him for evidence, so he went online to scold him, which was a vicious circle.

Sometimes I think? If we want to say that there was no internet at that time, legal knowledge was not popularized. Now that the Internet is so developed, is there still a serious information asymmetry? As the other one said:

The Internet originally carried the hope of communication, learning, openness and understanding, and such superior technical conditions were unimaginable before. But it happened that some people could regard this tool of 2 1 century as a machete of 1 1 century.

Yes, why didn't the technology of natural revolution bring revolution? A bosom friend who has left Zhihu, his article may give us some enlightenment: Why are more and more college students addicted to games? -Answers from users in Zhihu. He said, why are games attractive and courses unattractive? You should observe the installation process of the game, which contains tens of thousands of files. These documents are made by hundreds of people in a year, but what about the courses? Teachers are all fighting alone now. Therefore, in the final analysis, it is a question of production strength. In the final analysis, the emergence of the Internet will bring a turn for the better, because teachers can discuss how to make a courseware of a course together and then publish it online in the name of * * * *.

This story tells us that you will surely win, not because you are politically correct, or because you feel that you represent justice and the direction of advanced productive forces. The key still depends on strength. What strength does our group of popular science parties, a group of poor students, our opposites have? Let's take a look at this answer: Why is popular science so difficult in China? What is the popular science environment abroad? -Answers from users in Zhihu.

Ignorance is the source of profiteering. Popular science will squeeze out oil and water.

Compared with practitioners, incense burners, fortune telling, selling Cordyceps sinensis, and pyramid selling, science popularization really has nothing to gain. Where can there be corresponding social forces? On the contrary, some sects, if you dare to say no to him, fight with your life.

By the way, I mentioned at the beginning that the litigants in this case lack insurance awareness, which can't be blamed on them. In fact, the insurance awareness in China is declining. In the 1990s, my family bought firewire and kept buying me medical insurance. Not anymore. It's all savings insurance and dividend-sharing, because selling that kind of insurance is very profitable. After the promotion of savings insurance through pyramid schemes, the pockets of insurance companies and salesmen have swelled, but people's impression of insurance has plummeted.

We are paid across the street, and we are just a group of popular science parties who bring their own dry food. . . . . . How can we win?

But even so, I still see many popular science parties working hard on Zhihu, such as linguistics, mathematics, Manchu, Qing history and women's rights. Every time I read their articles, I see hope. Our enemies can succeed because they realize that there are many situational utilitarians in China, like the litigants in this case, who pursue "how this situation is beneficial to people". However, with the development of science and technology and the efforts of the popular science party, people will gradually develop, so the criminal rule of combining leniency with severity is not really beneficial to them.

Rule utilitarianism ("exquisite egoist"-PX Factory-Zhihu column) is really suitable for this modern society. They may be liberals who are strict with themselves, or socialists who are lenient with others (well, this expression is actually very, very inaccurate). But at least, unlike those situational utilitarians who are "strict with themselves and lenient with others", they shout that they are liberals in order to ask others to treat themselves according to socialist standards.

I'm talking about science again. Let's go back to the original "Trial Measures for the Management of Social Assistance Funds for Road Traffic Accidents". What is the situation, how to help, how high is the level, and what is the standard? Liberalism and socialism will continue to argue ... moral hazard and the information asymmetry behind it are still one of the biggest problems in social science, but as long as we have enough rule utilitarianism and enough citizens to adapt to the modern society ruled by law, we will.