I commented on it after the fact that every other cliche' about motorless had been brought up already (finishing up with the insurability question). Sometimes I really wonder how we got from where we once were as Americans to the point where we can't poop without insurance or a host of other safety nets.
The use of "cliche" to describe others' opinions implies that they are "trite", "hackneyed", or basically worn out themes--per Merriam-Webster. Sounds like name-calling rather that reasonable discourse.
What is wrong with raising the actuarial aspect of insurability? My point was that there may be objective data out there that you might use to determine your level of risk if you go off engineless. I thought that was a reasonable suggestion. If the actuarial data establishes an unreasonable risk that would make you uninsurable, wouldn't you want to know that? At the data level, it doesn't matter whether or not you actually buy insurance.
At another level, you might interpret from the price of a liability policy how much of a risk to other folks you represent. If you have modest resources, as your story implies, I doubt that you can demonstrate financial responsibility without insurance, should you suffer a major disaster involving other people. Conceivably you might be forced to abandon your boat some day. I hope you've got a contingency plan to cover salvage costs.
There is a problem with derelict boats in this country. Too often the dream dies--for any number of reasons--and a public nuisance is created. The public invariably pays to pick up the pieces, including legal costs to enable disposal of abandoned or unseaworthy boats.