It should be obvious that insurance serves as financial benefit for the insured or else the insurance industry would have collapsed a long time ago.
You know what we call a business that makes enough money on float to cover its operating costs? A bank.
If the float was so lucrative they wouldn't need to charge "high enough to matter" premiums.
Insurance companies don't have magical investments they can make that other businesses can't. They're not going to be making $0.50 on the dollar you give them. They're going to be making pennies, just like literally everyone else. This will mostly go toward subsidizing operating costs. In no universe do insurance companies make enough profit from their money pile to even come close to offsetting payouts.
The fact of the matter is that theft affects the entire area so it WILL be reflected in premiums, the same way things like the climate and adverse weather are reflected in premiums.
>It should be obvious that insurance serves as financial benefit for the insured or else the insurance industry would have collapsed a long time ago.
Using insurance to cover routine expenses never makes financial sense. There's a reason businesses self-insure as much as they can.
Just because a financial product can be a net win doesn't mean that it will still be a net win if you use it exactly the wrong way. Speaking of things that should be obvious...
I didn't say float was enough to cover their operating costs. I said insurance companeis can and often do run for long stretches in which premiums do not cover claims. Float is the way this is accomplished. If an insurance company goes long stretches in which premiums do exeed claims, customers will begin to turn away. Interest on float is free money and therefore float has value regardless of how small the returns. These companies want as much float as possible and offering favorable terms to their clients is a great way to increase total available float.