Car Insurance

I don't know.

On one hand, it seems unfair to discriminate on sex and age. On the other, insurance is driven by statistics and probability charts.

Perhaps it would be more fair to judge on experience and personal accident history.

 

Car insurance is discriminatory by nature, as is life insurance and health insurance.

It's an undeniable fact that drivers under 25 are far more prone to accidents than those that are over 25, so their auto insurance is higher.

Women live longer than men. Their life insurance is cheaper.

Women spend more on health care than me. Their health insurance is higher.

Actuarial tables tell all.

 

Sorry.

I lost control for a moment. Forgot I wasn't a liberal.

 

>Car insurance is discriminatory by nature, as is life insurance and health insurance.<

Car insurance and house insurance conform to traditional insurance principles, rating risks and setting premium according to risk. It is not discriminatory if all equivalent risks pay the same. For example, it is discriminatory if tee totalers subsidize habitual drunk drivers.

Prior to '64 life insurance followed insurance principles. For example, white males live about 8 years longer than black males so black males paid a higher permium because the company had to generate the same approx revenue by the time the person died. Now days, white people subsidize black people.

Health "insurance" is a prepaid medical service, not insurance, and doesn't conform to insurance principles. For example, one can't buy fire insurance while the fire department is putting out a fir in your house. Why should you be able to buy health "insurance" while the doctors are trying to cure your AIDS or cancer?

Health "insurance" was invented during the wage freeze of WW2. Companies needed a non-cash benefit to attract the better workers thus "major medical" insurance was invented. It only covered accidental injuries and ovenight hospital stays. It did NOT cover pre-existing conditions. Injuries during some dangerous activities were excluded for coverage. As long as these limitations were in place it remained "insurance."

 

SCB,

I am an auto insurance claims rep for a major insurance company, so that might make me a little biased, if hopefully somewhat informed. The best way I heard insurance explained is that it's basically like a trip to the casino, it's a gamble. The gamble is that you won't have to pay more in premium than you might recover in benefits or than you might have to pay if you were at fault in an accident. Premium differences are simply evening up the odds because the odds vary, as others have said here, statistically by various factors (including the purported fact that drivers of red cars are more likely to be in an accident).

Hope that helps.

FTR