+1 and as someone who worked for an insurance company I can concur. Amount paid out in claims is a pittance compared to what they make. What does that tell you?
I don't think it's quite as simple, and nobody confuses insurance companies with charity, that's why I never had me as a customer. But I know there are legit cases, and I would be one: If I loose my €8000 gear, I cannot replace it because I simply don't have the money. Money I don't have doesn't pay me interest in the bank. So for risks that are too great to cope with on my own (same thing: health care) I consider insurance a good idea, even though it's basically another means of transferring wealth from "have nots" to "haves" because as written above if you've got enough money insurance might be considered a waste of it except if you want to pay for a subjective "peace of mind".
The chances of losing absolutely everything are pretty low (especially in a double-brick house with only a wooden roof to burn).
My "problem" is that I am very well able to carry 100% of my gear around, and often I do, it's (or will be) "only" 2 camera bodies + 4 lenses + the usual flash-filter stuff. And it's all conveniently packed into one bag, though I try to make it look as cheap as possible from the outside...
.. .and fortunately, in Germany there seem to be ok companies like the one menitoned above that is specialized in dslr equipment so figuring out what the terms are should be possible even for non-lawyers like me. The rates are reasonable or to be expected, I guess:
0€ co-payment: 3.25% of gear value
100€ co-payment: 2.5% of gear value
250€ co-payment: 2.0% of gear value
1000€ co-payment: 1.6% of gear value