Male Teen Drivers

admin: Discriminating against concepts is different than discriminating against people. Take that fallacy into account.

The Female can do anything the Male can do, or the feminists were wrong and we can set back our gender equality ideals a 100 years.

Blackflag: It's no different for home insurance than life or vehicle insurance. An insurance company assesses the risk factors and calculates what they expect to pay out and when. That applies when looking at the chances of a home being robbed or a person crashing their car. There's no real difference in risk assessment there.

Females COULD crash cars more, and then their premiums would rise. It's simple statistics. If they were basing their demographic measures on assumptions then that would be unfair, but they're basing them on risk profile assessment, which is different.

admin: It doesn't seem like you to promote discrimination and disenfranchisement in favor of economic efficiency. That is what you are promoting just so you know.

If females crash more cars, I am guessing the statistic is circumstantial, or refers to a specific minority of the female culture which is more likely to crash cars. Someone out there is a superb female driver who is forced to pay a discriminatory premium because other humans of the feminine identity gave her a bad rep as a driver.

Blackflag: And that's why the companies have that incentive to narrow the demographic profile as far as they can. And they do. In this case, female teen drivers. The older you get, the more the price gap narrows, in general. Older male drivers are just as responsible if not more so than females.

Basically, I fully support the right of companies to charge prices for services based on their own expectations of cost (with certain very rare exceptions for providing basic human needs or public goods). This is not discrimination any more than charging more for smokers' life insurance premiums is discrimination.

admin: I get where you are coming from, but gender is a seriously broad demographic (51% of the human population), and at the same time, gender does not influence driving abilities, which these corportations know.

This is justifying a greed-driven price raise which disenfranchises quite a large group of people unfairly, like it or not. Agreed?

Blackflag: Actually, gender does affect risk-taking behaviors. They're not measuring who can drive the safest, they're measuring what risks those people are likely to take. It is broad, but it isn't the ONLY thing that determines premiums.

admin: Are you implying that we should accept an unjust discriminatory policy as legitimate, simply because it was the only unjust policy put forward?

Blackflag: I don't accept the premise that it is unjust. If there was some statistically validated superior method for quickly assessing risk, then insurance companies would have every incentive to switch to it, and I'd be all in favor. But if your argument is that price discrimination on the basis of a risk profile is illegitimate for an insurance company, then like it or not, you're the one doing a greed-driven price rise that disenfranchises everyone except teenage males. Which is way more people than teenage males.