Total cost to taxpayers: $663,000 and probably more hidden costs not shown on this tally... Now suppose you had to pay for this rescue if the Coast Guard did not do this sort of thing and must be paid by your insurance... you think that 'self funded' fund you have would take care of this?
Yes ... would be devastating I'm sure. But once again, all you're seeing/presenting is the impact of an event. You're ignoring the likelihood. The odds of any serious event happening to any of us while on the water is tiny. The stats are clear. Look up USCG marine accident stats, or some such thing. There's a great online database where you can do all sorts of personal research on the subject.
The point I'm trying to make (if there is much of a point here), is that people need to think rationally about the actual risk, and not just be driven by fear of "what it" scenarios. Risk is proportional to both
and the Likelihood
of the event happening. The fact is, most of the boating and sailing most people do is, by actual measure, exceedingly safe. The number of people injured, drowned or blown up in alcohol fires (or any fuel fire) each year is a rounding error. The amount of actual damage to boats due to accidents and negligence is also very small. This means the real risk to most of us is very small.
If you can't live with this level of risk, or if money is no issue, then by all means, purchase lots of insurance. But for most of us, resources are not infinite, and we all need to make choices as to where best to spend our boat bucks. Money spent on improving your boat will more likely result in a safer boat, compared to wasting it on an insurance policy.
But you're right, of course. If you're so lucky as to sink, crash, or get blown up in a fiery alcohol fire, then you'll win the insurance lottery. In that case, you'll be happy to have lots of insurance.
Fun. Thanks. I feel safer now