While the post you are replying to is completely wrong (as someone else pointed out they appear to never have heard of comprehensive or collision insurance), I think it's fair to have a debate about whether property damage liability should be capped on the roads.

That is, if I decide to drive a car where the bumper is made of Fabergé eggs, and someone dings my bumper, why should they have to pay me a couple million to replace my couple broken Fabergé eggs? Obviously that's a fake example, but is that really much different from having to pay extreme amounts to fix someone's Lamborghini or Bugatti? It seems more rational to me to conclude that people driving insanely expensive cars on public roads are taking ill-advised risks and should need to shoulder more of that risk.