No, it makes perfect sense to me. The reality is that if you're buying
travel insurance for just to cover the $3000 price of the trip itself, you're probably not getting a good financial return on your investment in insurance. Insurance -- any type of inusrance -- is a money-making enterprise, of course, so you can rest assured that you're paying more in premiums than you are getting in disbursements, on the average. Therefore, for any unfortunate event that you could cover with your own savings, you're always financially better-off "self-insuring" -- i.e., not buying insurance, but paying for what the insurance coverage would pay for from your own pocket.
There are two aspects that make travel insurance essential:
1) Many many people cannot stomach the idea of paying $300 (or whatever) for some small treatment from the ship infirmary. That's not a decision that protects your finances, but rather one that protects your sanity. People who can gladly -- gladly -- pay $300 for some small treatment from the infirmary without it disturbing the pleasant enjoyment of their trip (because they know that odds are that most people never need to do so aboard ship, so they simply got unluckly this time -- oh well -- "
no big deal") probably
don't need travel insurance
based on this aspect.
2) Many many people cannot afford to pay the costs associated with catastrophes, i.e., the aforementioned medical air evacuation, out of their savings. It is unlikely to happen, if it does happen, you need to be protected.