undefined | Better HN

0 pointsneilc12y ago0 comments

If gender is predictive of higher/lower risk for a particular policy, then banning its use seems bizarre. It makes even less sense if the the insurance company is allowed to consider other factors that are correlated with gender (e.g., age, profession).

0 comments

5 comments · 2 top-level

pessimizer12y ago· 3 in thread

The case that can be made for banning such a practice is that gender doesn't determine higher/lower risk, it's just associated with it. There's nothing about gender in an of itself that makes you drive badly, even if 80% of women get together at a secret meeting and agree to drive badly. In that case, the 20% would be suffering discrimination purely because of their gender.

>It makes even less sense if the the insurance company is allowed to consider other factors that are correlated with gender (e.g., age, profession).

Agreed.

itsybitsycoder12y ago

>There's nothing about gender in an of itself that makes you drive badly, even if 80% of women get together at a secret meeting and agree to drive badly.

It's interesting you've assumed that it's the women who are paying the higher premiums. Contrary to the stereotype about women being bad drivers, it's men who pay the gender premium on car insurance.

Houshalter12y ago

>There's nothing about gender in an of itself that makes you drive badly, even if 80% of women get together at a secret meeting and agree to drive badly. In that case, the 20% would be suffering discrimination purely because of their gender.

Look at it the other way around. By not taking it into account, 100% of men would be suffering because of the 80% of women.

In any case, this isn't any different with all other factors. Age and profession for example. There are really good 16 year old drivers, why should they have to pay higher insurance? By your logic making any predictions is wrong if they aren't 100% accurate. Gender is just a subcase.

nitrogen12y ago

Making any decision with the potential to damage society and perpetuate class divisions, without 100% accuracy, is wrong. Because human lives are more important than maximizing profit.

1 more reply

russellsprouts12y ago

If it were illegal for all companies, you could probably assume each company would have approximately an equal number of men and women. They could charge the men and women the same price - the average of the old men's and women's rates. The income would be the same.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse