No, I certainly don't, but the cost of insuring a $2000 laptop is more cost effective than saving the equivalent amount, it would take me approximately 20 years to put enough into a savings account to cover its loss if I put the same in as the insurance premium on it.
Insurance is there to protect against the unexpected, hopefully I'll never have another laptop stolen again, but it's cheaper to cover the loss with an insurance policy in case it happens again.
EDIT: In addition, insurance is designed to spread the risk. If 200 people pay $10/mo to insure their $2000 laptops, and one is stolen every other month, the insurance company still comes out on top.
Setting aside catastrophic losses˚ there seem to be roughly two strategies. You can take out insurance on your non-catastrophic items, or you could take the money that you would pay into insurance and instead save / invest it.
We should expect the insurance strategy to be a net win iff the insurance company loses money on the account. If it feels otherwise, a combination of the loss aversion and hyperbolic discount rate biases may be at work.
On the other hand, it's easy to end up in a financial situation where coming up with $2,000 on short notice is very difficult, and at that point there may be value in using insurance to shift the cost from a random large cost to smaller and more predictable chunks. It's just worth knowing that this is not cheaper.
˚ I'll define catastrophic losses as those things that must be replaced quickly and which cost enough that replacing them out of pocket would be a severe hardship if they're able to at all.
Insurance is there to protect against the unexpected, hopefully I'll never have another laptop stolen again, but it's cheaper to cover the loss with an insurance policy in case it happens again.
EDIT: In addition, insurance is designed to spread the risk. If 200 people pay $10/mo to insure their $2000 laptops, and one is stolen every other month, the insurance company still comes out on top.