Why is it fair for men to pay more for auto insurance?

[Kurska]

Last edited Tue Oct 29, 2013, 06:11 PM - Edit history (2)

Personally, I don't think gender should be a factor in determining the cost of insurance. However, currently you can't jack up the rates of health insurance on women for being women, yet you can do it to men for car insurance for being men. Men, especially younger men, pay far more for car insurance than women of the same age do. You can say that car insurance isn't a right like health insurance is, but I'm very curious how you would recommend to someone that they hold their job, when they live in a rural area with nearly zero mass transit, without a car. To function in many parts of society, having a car is very much a requirement. Some might argue even more a requirement than having health insurance, you can't even afford the health insurance if you can't hold a job.

The argument for higher rates is exactly the same in both cases. Men use their auto insurance more and women require more healthcare, overall obviously.

So why is it okay in one instance and not okay in another? I don't rightly recall anyone ever seeming upset that men get a pretty bum deal when it comes to auto insurance.

I'm a young guy and I've never had an accident that the insurance company got involved in. I pay out the nose for auto insurance. I know women with accidents on their history who still get lower rates than me. If it isn't fair in health care, why is it fair in auto insurance?

On Edit: I am amazed by the number of people who didn't even read the first line of my OP. Let me point it out to you.

Personally, I don't think gender should be a factor in determining the cost of insurance.
Personally, I don't think gender should be a factor in determining the cost of insurance.

I'm not arguing women should pay more for health insurance. I'm arguing that men shouldn't pay more for car insurance if we're going to apply the same standard (which is the standard I agree is fair)

So if you enter this thread only to say that I am arguing to punish women, then congratulations you might be illiterate.

[surrealAmerican]

1. It's not fair.

But just because one kind of insurance is unfair doesn't mean every kind should be equally unfair. Yours is a good argument for further regulating the insurance industry.

[Puzzledtraveller]

2. It isn't.

[ScreamingMeemie]

3. I don't believe anyone has said that it is is fair.

[penultimate]

4. They factor in lots of unfair shit, I think...

Some even take into account your credit score? Like wtf?

It should be based solely on your driving history and record. I've noticed the same thing, I've never had an accident but my insurance through through the same company was higher than a female who had two fairly recent accidents. I've even been driving longer than her...

[Fawke Em]

53. Actually, about 95 percent of them use your credit score now.

For both auto and house insurance.

It's a racket.

My husband is a former insurance salesman-turned-underwriter and he'll tell you it's a racket.

[Recursion]

58. There's not a single long-term agreement in the world now that doesn't look at your credit score

Welcome to the 21st century.

[penultimate]

71. Employers that look at credits scores baffle me the most..

I get it for some jobs, I guess. Although even then, I don't think poor credit means you're going to steal. After all, maybe someone with perfect credit has perfect credit because they steal everything... As for it being a way to determine responsibility, total bullshit too, because things happen outside the control of even the most responsible person.

The logic behind denying someone a job because of credit is not something I understand at all. I mean, we wouldn't want to offer them a job so they can go pay their bills to fix their credit. Let's just keep them down by preventing them from finding employment. I'm sure someone will say they can always find another job at McDonald's or Walmart. Which may be true, but it's kinda hard to support yourself and pay down your debt if you're only making $8/hr...

I'm all for people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps and working toward bettering themselves, but why the hell do so many feel the urge to keep kicking the bootstraps away from people when they try to grab them?

[Recursion]

75. Same here. I mean, bank teller or something I get

But, for an office job? Are they worried you'll steal the petty cash?

It's mostly just tribal/class signalling, IMO.

[beerandjesus]

5. I'd like to know too....

Kicking to see if anyone has an answer.

[DURHAM D]

6. If they pass the Equal Rights Amendment rating up men will stop.

[gollygee]

7. +1

Write your congressional rep!

[Recursion]

60. ^^ Win (nt)

[Kurska]

91. ERA should have been passed yesterday

We need a nation wide law that bans consideration of gender, race, sexuality or national origin by any company for any reason for any service.

Then we'd actually be a step toward a society that has a foundation in equality.

[ismnotwasm]

92. +1000

[moriah]

8. Insurance is about management of risk. Health care should be about *care*.

Health care is going to have to move out of a "risk management" philosophy as the risk pool is eventually widened to 100% of the country. There's no way to make a profit off of betting on whether or not a group of people will get sick or not, when the group is everyone. And when that type of speculation is taken out of the picture and we focus on providing the best care for our dollar, we can actually start to have a real health *care* system.

Auto insurance, however, is highly speculative. They're trying to help people overcome some risk factors if they're willing to get the machines spy on them -- check out Progressive's little thingamagig you put in your car, Esurance also has one. It's allowing rates to be more personalized for the driver, which I think is a good thing.

[Kurska]

11. I am a man, ergo I will be charged more for auto insurance more than a female.

I don't care what you say about "risk management" that just isn't fair. If it doesn't fly for healthcare it shouldn't fly for something equally as important to many people.

By requiring people to get auto insurance to drive, we created the exact kind of market we have recently created for health insurance. It should be regulated in the same way.

[moriah]

16. No, it's not fair, especially given the mandatory nature of liability auto insurance.

For the time being, if you're willing to let them prove you're not a high risk despite the stereotypes, they'll let you try. Which I think is both a smart move for the companies and a good thing for all of us.

I believe in changing the system from within. It depends on if you're willing to let them potentially spy on your driving habits, though. I imagine it has a GPS interface to some degree to help out with recovery of the vehicle if it were stolen.

[ancianita]

62. It's not one bit speculative. It's based on national/state driving arrest and conviction statistics.

While many men are good drivers, the stats show that as a group, they have vastly poorer drunk driving accident, arrest and conviction rates than do women.

[moriah]

65. What I mean is, insurance is in the business of trying to make money by managing risk.

Speculation. Gambling.

That's what insurance really is. Of course, so is the stock market, and people think it's intelligent to gamble with our core retirement safety nets and people make a lot of money advising on how to gamble there, too.

There's all sorts of math behind both.

[ancianita]

68. The math supports the argument that they can make money, yes. It also shows who should pay it.

[moriah]

73. Correction, there's lots of good math behind both.

I was using "speculation" in the sense of "investment in stocks, property, or other ventures in the hope of gain but with the risk of loss" -- no positive or negative connotation except that I think there are some things that should be gambled with, and some that shouldn't.

If it's a concern about mandated coverage not being fair to all groups, I'd be willing to accept a higher liability premium as a woman, up to the state mandated limits. People do have other choices about their insurance coverage, and I don't know if many car finance companies would want to screw with the underwriting for full coverage policies since most people only keep full coverage while making payments.

[ancianita]

78. As a woman, don't be quick to hand over your money, since state and national stats are not unfair.

You said: "...Speculation. Gambling.

That's what insurance really is. Of course, so is the stock market..." As if those two are equally gamblers and speculators. They're not.

Insurance companies aren't special in stock market gambling. But right now they have more accountability to the market than do entirely too many stock speculators and hedge fund gamblers. So your claim that they're equally speculative only set up a mental derail here.

As for insurance, those with the worst driving records pay the most; those with the best pay the least. Good drivers drive down bad drivers' rates as much as bad drivers drive up good drivers' rates. But...Companies start at a base rate based on your group -- a fair grouping based on common demographic measures like age, gender and region, then tailor their premium charges to your ongoing safety record.

[Myrina]

9. They're based on traditional gender stereotypes ...

... "young men and their cars", as it were - speeding, cruising, being reckless ... would warrant higher premiums. Whether that behavioral assumption is factually true, though, is doubtful.

I have never heard 'women require more healthcare'. What is meant by that? And since insurance companies are so obsessed with actuarial data and medical/claim histories, I'd like to see some proof. Because this woman hasn't needed to see a dr for more than an annual checkup in over 15 years.


Both sets of assumptions are bs (not aimed at the OP) that society would do well to get beyond.

[moriah]

13. In my experience, guys got pulled over far more often with me in the car...

... than they did on their own.

Then one guy I dated in high school came back by to see me and show off his new car, which he took up to 100 on the freeway before he slowed his ass down -- when I reminded him of just how many tickets he got trying to show off for me back then....

I feel culpable, somehow.

[denverbill]

35. It's not based on stereotypes. It's based on statistics.

And it is factually true.

Insurance companies don't just speculate on what different drivers are likely to cost them. They have REAMS of statistics to back them up. Young, male drivers are statistically some of the worst risks.

If that wasn't backed up statistically, it would be obvious very quickly. If company A charged equal amounts for young men and women, and company B didn't, young men would flock would flock to company A for their lower rates and young women to company B for their lower rates. If indeed the young men had more accidents, company A would lose gobs of money.

Progressive was one of the first insurance companies to really differentiate higher risks and higher rates. They rewarded drivers they predicted would have fewer claims with lower rates. Drivers they predicted would have more claims were charged higher rates. That had the added bonus to Progressive of driving their bad drivers off away from Progressive on onto their competitors who had worse predictive models.

You can certainly say it might not be fair to charge more or less based on various factors and legislate against it. But you can't say they are basing their rates on speculation because it's certainly not.

[ancianita]

64. No they're absolutely not. You're wrong about the gender stereotype thing. Lots of social stuff is

stereotyped thinking, but car accidents, arrest and conviction rates do differ greatly between genders.

[alarimer]

98. No, it's based on statistics, not stereotypes.

Men, especially young ones, DO have a higher rate of accidents, of speeding, of tickets of various kinds.

They also factor in what kind of car you drive, whether you own it or there's a lien and where you live.

I've had my insurance go up (and down) when I moved a few blocks. Maybe there are more break-ins in some neighborhoods.

[djean111]

10. First, because buying auto insurance is only mandated if you CHOOSE to drive a car.

Second, because statistically young men, have more accidents.
Perhaps your argument would resonate with auto insurance companies, but it has nothing to do with health care costs being shared amongst all living people. Your argument would basically be going back to having people with pre-existing conditions unable to afford health care.

Auto insurance is in no way the same thing as health insurance. You cannot choose to never be sick or injured.

[Kurska]

14. Tell me how I would go about never "choosing" to drive in the rural south.

Driving a car isn't a choice in a society where we have gutted public transportation.

"Your argument would basically be going back to having people with pre-existing conditions unable to afford health care. "

What on earth are you talking about? I never even remotely said that. I prefaced my arguement with the fact I don't think gender should be used to determine premiums on ANYTHING.

[djean111]

22. I meant carrying your argument out to a logical conclusion.

Being a woman, I suppose, is a "pre-existing condition". So to charge more for a woman puts us back to where we don't all share the costs. Would being sterile or having a hysterectomy get one a discount.

I had never thought to get pissy about having to share the costs for prostate cancer and Viagra.

I hear you about having to drive to a job. I hear others about paying more because of a low credit score.
But your argument is actually with auto insurers, not with health insurance. Those two things are not equal in any way.

[Kurska]

36. The argument is it is the same argument for both cases

Men cost more for driving insurance, so charge them more. Women cost more for health insurance, so charge them more.

I reject both these arguments as offensive to the concept of equality and fairness between sexes. Some people, even in this thread, seem to reject only one.

I really don't understand why.

[djean111]

38. Because evryone does not drive.

[Kurska]

43. And not everyone buys health insurance

Or goes to the Doctor.

Really have no idea how people hold the idea that the genders are equal and should be treated equally, yet think it is okay to jack up the rates on one gender for one service. Yet it is unfair to do the same to the other gender is another circumstance, even if it is jusitifed by the same logic.

I guess cognitive dissonance, like auto insurance rates, isn't applied equally.

[ancianita]

66. Health insurance applies equally because every single one of us WILL NEED HEALTH CARE at some point.

[moriah]

85. Every human on this earth spent at least some time IN a uterus.

As I said, if you're concerned about fair and equitable application of laws insofar as mandated liability coverage, yes, I'd be happy to pay the averaged difference in premiums between a man my age and a woman my age on that portion of my policy.

When "fair and equitable" and "free market" collide, though, you get a lot of argument about what is fair to the companies.

Maybe those who haven't gotten sick don't realize how precious good health is, and how lucky they are to have it. But I hope everyone appreciates the gift of life itself. Again, paying for maternity care should be about the next generation having a better life. Not a men vs women thing.

[ancianita]

57. Too bad. Statistics of car-related crime by gender put the lie to your claims. See my other post

below.

I know you mean well with the "both genders are equal" and all, but the costs men drive up for others must be reckoned with through insurance premiums. Men's driving behaviors -- among other behaviors -- cost everyone more, and insurance companies charge accordingly.

[MattBaggins]

100. what about life insurance?

[joeglow3]

30. How very un-Democratic of you

Most Democrats I know recognize the necessity of an automobile for everyone to succeed in society. It is one of the biggest impediments for poor people getting jobs, getting healthy food, etc. Suddenly, you claim it is a choice????

[djean111]

37. In the reality of today's world, yes.

Are you proposing that everyone be given a car, and no insurance, the government will just pay for accidents?
Or give everyone a car, and we will all be on Medicar! One premium for everybody!
The issue is with car insurance, not with health insurance. The ideal health insurance would be single payer.
I guess the ideal car insurance would be single-payer, too.

[Kurska]

45. "the ideal car insurance would be single-payer" ding ding, we have a winner.

If someone is too dangerous to insure without an arm and a leg, they shouldn't be on the road anyways.

[Kurska]

15. And women require more healthcare

Again if it is fair in one instance, it should be fair in the other.

I don't think it is fair in either.

[MissMillie]

19. Gender is not something you can choose

However, how one drives (safely vs. unsafely) is certainly w/i one's control.

I have seen commercials for one company (Allstate, I think) that gives rebate checks for people who remain accident free.

Maybe this is the way to go. Charge everyone the same rates, even if the rates are a little higher for everyone and then give rebate checks to those who avoid accidents and violations.

[Fumesucker]

40. I disagree, I've known people who simply shouldn't drive

Some minority of the population really don't belong behind the wheel, I've known people of both sexes who terrified me to ride in their car and others whose driving doesn't bother me.

Reflexes, vision, attention span, fine muscular control, spatial perceptions and mental modeling of those perceptions along with other aspects of human ability all play a big part in driving safely and there are those who simply don't have enough of what it takes to be a safe driver.

[moriah]

52. I think I'm safe enough with four wheels, but not two.

I have depth perception issues and rely on cues that many people find odd when I drive to determine where cars are. I also am very, very clumsy. I *know* I'm safer driving on ice and snow than I am walking on it. So while I think I'm a decent driver, I will *not* drive a motorcycle.

That being said, the only accident I had that was my fault was when I rear-ended an elderly couple who did something stupid at the light -- still my fault, I shouldn't have been that close. I fully expected a ticket but the officer apparently was touched by the fact that when he got there I was trying to convince them to go to the ER to get checked out.

[mercuryblues]

17. In

some states it is illegal to charge more based on sex. As it should be.

[Politicalboi]

18. It's not fair

Like it's not fair to charge you $5.00 extra a month because you're single either. Gays couldn't help but pay that shit.

[oldhippie]

20. It depends on what your concept of "Insurance" is ......

It was originally conceived as a means to spread RISK among groups of people with similar risks (e.g., shipping companies.) It has recently evolved to a politically based concept of sharing COSTS. The great debate is who gets to pay those costs, and in what proportions.

[BainsBane]

21. Health and auto insurance aren't comparable

You don't need a car to live. Also your own insurance rates depend a lot on your individual driving record. My understanding is actuarial data is used to gauge your level of risk, but as you develop a driving record, that plays a significant role.

[moriah]

25. Eh, transportation is kind of essential to work, which is pretty essential to live.

Not all of us are blessed to live in an area with abundant mass transportation.

I like the thingies you can use to let them monitor your driving. Since my premium was jacked because I've been out of work and my credit report sucks, I used one. And since I figure if anyone's tracking my whereabouts they're able to do it through my phone, I'm not all that paranoid about them spying on my driving habits. I rarely speed (though if they're using mapquest speed limit data, they might be wrong in that one), and the other bit of data they use I heard was number of times of sudden acceleration and breaking.

Insurance is institutionalized gambling. Health care should not be something we wager on.

[BainsBane]

26. I personally resent having to have auto insurance at all

I think it's a scam for the insurance companies. Whereas health coverage should be a basic right.
Insurance companies are parasites on society.

[djean111]

33. So if you are responsible for an accident in which I am injured and/or my car is damaged,

that is just tough shit for me? Or, I suppose, I could sue you personally, take your car or house or whatever.....

[BainsBane]

46. You have recourse to the courts

all mandatory insurance does is line the pockets of the insurance companies.

[djean111]

47. What if I cannot afford a lawyer? What if you have nothing to take?

What if you cannot afford to pay my hospital bills or replace my car?
What do I do while a court case is happening? Lose everything I have to medical bills, and lose my job because I have no car?
Yes, about the insurance companies, but how is it fair for someone to drive at all if they cannot pay for any accident they cause?

[oldhippie]

69. In a just society, you would be permitted to ......

... kill the uninsured person that caused so much grief. And probably their whole family. That's the way it worked in medieval times. It would cut down on a lot of litigation.

(Just in case ..... )

[BainsBane]

74. We pay uninsured motorist coverage, don't we?

Seems to me we are double paying.

[oldhippie]

70. You don't have to have auto insurance, even to drive on public roads .....

In most states you could post a surety bond instead.

I have really evil thoughts towards uninsured drivers. You wouldn't like them.

[seabeyond]

23. i am insuring a 16 and 18 yr old. nto fair. lets end it today. nt

[mercuryblues]

24. Insurance companies

set rates by your driving record. However when a teen gets their license there is no record to look at. So they do set rates based on the car they are driving, whether they took drivers ED or not and grades in school. Also gender. Statistically men do have more accidents, speeding tickets and DUI's. It is not a stereotype. So that factors into it. is it fair? not really.

By the age of 25, if a man has established a good record his rate will go down. Another thing that will bring his rate down, getting married.

[seabeyond]

27. husband totalled two vehicles 19 yrs, son one, i none... just a second, gotta knock on some wood...

cause we have to do family packet my rate is at a higher rate cause of their fuck ups.

fair?

reality.

edit... i posted on your post cause i wanted to say, everything you say is correct. driving school, grades, alcohol class, all brings down rate.

[mercuryblues]

42. you should see our rates

(lather)
My daughter totaled out my car in her senior year in HS.
just after my daughter graduated college, she backed into a guy in a parking lot. She was indignant that I tossed her off our policy. She still says she is a good driver.


(rinse)

My son has several speeding tickets and several accidents , where he was at fault and a no seatbelt citation.

After my son had his last accident, I flat out told him one more and he is done. We simply can not afford to pay any higher for our insurance. Every day before he leaves for college, I tell him to be careful driving. He always replies "as always" After the last accident' a few weeks ago I started telling him that's what I am afraid of. He has had a few mishaps that we didn't make claims for on top of all that. He took a brand new looking, great running Chevy Silverado and destroyed it.


(repeat)

By the time our rates will finally drop after he graduates and gets his own vehicle, it will be time for the youngest to get his license.

[penultimate]

76. My parent's are going through that with my little brother

He's been in more than a few accidents and received his fair share of speeding tickets (probably shouldn't be driving in my opinion) He has pretty much destroyed two decent vehicles and the paying the difference on their insurance, which is about $400/mo now. For him to get insurance on his own, he'd have to pay out like $1,500/mo for full coverage at most places.

[seabeyond]

79. OMG... lol, ya. all this. my oldest gets no more chances. two. any more, he is off.

youngest just starting. his first mishap we kept off insurance. i told him, he doesnt even get one. lol

it is damn expensive to insure a family.

ok. you are worse off than i am. lol

[liberal N proud]

28. Insurance companies also set rates based on geography

Move from the true midwest (Iowa, Missouri, Kansas) to Ohio and your rates will be significantly higher.

They base their rates on drivers records by region.

[madinmaryland]

80. Our rates dropped in half when we moved from Maryland

to southwestern Ohio! So it is even less in Iowa?

[liberal N proud]

87. We were in northern Missouri, but yes

At least 20% difference when we moved to northeast Ohio.

[madinmaryland]

96. I see. I assume you would be in the Cleveland area, which would be higher than even

where I am in Ohio. Same effect in Columbus and Cincinnati area, also.

[liberal N proud]

103. Yep

[cynatnite]

31. Our daughter wanted to get out of the driving class at school...

We wouldn't let her because taking it lowered our rates.

[denverbill]

29. Insurance companies, whether health or auto, will underwrite policies based on whatever the law is.

If a state passes a law saying men and women have to be charged the same rates for auto insurance, companies will modify their underwriting accordingly. Women will therefore pay more for their insurance than they deserve to based on their likelihood of accidents, and men less.

Same thing for credit score. Some states have laws banning insurance companies from charging a customer more based on their credit score even though statistically, people with lower scores have more claims. In states that ban it, customers with good credit scores get charged more.

A state could theoretically ban charging more for young drivers, or even ban charging more for bad drivers. The result would be the same. People more likely to cause accidents will be charged less and those less likely will be charged more.

It's completely up to the states to set the rules on what they think is fair. Insurance companies will always be looking for ways to get an edge and either charge more for groups more likely to cause accidents or charge less for those less likely. Unless a practice is specifically banned by a state, insurance companies will continue to find better risks.

I work for an insurance company, and I can really understand both sides on any of these rules. Is it 'fair' for us to charge people with low credit scores higher auto rates? After all, people with lower scores are generally poorer and least able to afford higher insurance costs. Then again, they are more likely to have unsafe vehicles, engage in risky behavior, and commit insurance fraud. Is it fair to charge other drivers more to make up for the costs of people who are more likely to have claims?

[moriah]

48. I'd not object to mandatory liability coverage up to state limits being made gender-neutral.

You can choose not to finance a car if you don't want to be required to pay full coverage, and honestly that's where most people's premiums go up.

[jeff47]

32. Two parts

First, cause of the higher costs is important. Most of women's higher healthcare costs are because they live longer, so they're using health care for longer. On a day-to-day basis, women cost very close to men. Men are cheaper in that situation because we aren't smart enough to go to a doctor until it's really bad.

OTOH, young men's higher insurance rates are caused by the much higher accident frequency. There's a direct, day-to-day correlation between the higher insurance costs and the higher accident rate. Heck, I know I drive a hell of a lot better and safer now that I'm pushing 40 instead of pushing 20.

But the second part is much more important:
Just because one thing isn't fair doesn't mean others should also be unfair. If you don't like the up-charge for young men on auto insurance, then fight against that. Don't fight for an up-charge in health insurance for women.

Fighting for others to receive unfair treatment just makes everything suck for everyone.

[lumberjack_jeff]

34. "Fair" isn't the issue.

Insurers will try to slice and dice their customers risks by as many actuarial criteria as they can find for the purpose of selling insurance to as many low-cost (ie profitable) individuals as they can.

"Fair" has nothing to do with it, profitable is their goal.

Men's medical insurance was cheaper because they don't go to the doctor and are therefore a profitable demographic.

[GeorgeGist]

39. Because ACA doesn't apply to auto insurance.

[sinkingfeeling]

41. Car insurance rates are based on statistical risk. Young males have/cause

more accidents. Pregnancy is covered for any male who needs it under the ACA.

[MADem]

44. Why is it fair for people under 25 to pay more for auto insurance? Performance.

The best auto insurance companies charge based on performance. My auto insurance gives me huge discounts and a rebate every year, because I am a safe driver who doesn't get into accidents or get speeding tickets. In my younger years, before I proved myself to be a safe driver, I paid much more.

You'll get your money back on the back end, assuming you don't speed or smash up your car.

As for health insurance, EVERYONE has taken advantage of the "maternity benefit" at minimum at one point in their lives--EVERYONE. Unless you were grown in a petrie dish, or manufactured like a robot, you got here via some iteration of the maternity ward.

You don't need to own a vagina to have availed yourself of one as a means of your creation and birth.

It's in the interest of everyone in the nation to insure that the next generation--the ones who will be paying into the previous generation's social security--is born hale, hearty, healthy and able to work and contribute to society. Good health starts with good maternity care.

It's a no-brainer to everyone save the selfish and short-sighted.

[moriah]

49. Thank you. :)

People don't seem to get this one, maybe because they already "got theirs"?

It's best for everyone if kids have good prenatal care. It's not about the mothers, it's about the kids.

[MADem]

50. And it's about US, too! Those "kids" are gonna be wiping our asses and serving us our pudding if

we live to ripe old age....I think it would be better if we had kids assisting us who grew up in healthful circumstances, who were strong enough to lift us off the crapper and on to the shower stool, and who were smart enough to understand that the gurgling noise might mean we are choking and not imitating some bozo on a cartoon.

If ya can't appeal to their altruism, appeal to their selfish nature! No matter what way we slice this, a rising tide will actually lift all boats in this circumstance!

[gopiscrap]

51. they'll say it's because they get into more accidents

[Recursion]

54. I tell you what: work with us for a nationwide non-profit public auto insurance regime

and I promise you you'll pay exactly as much as women do

[ancianita]

55. It's totally fair. You just haven't bothered to find out why.

It's not a pretty bum deal. In fact, statistics show that men get a pretty goddamned good deal in this country in taxes, because stats show that they cause the vast majority of social, medical and legal damage and COST to the rest of society. Women should get their taxes lowered, premiums lowered, while men get them both raised.

I'm about to show you why you sound like some white people who peevishly whine "Why isn't there a white history month?"

1. Insurance companies can't be gender discriminatory. They use national statistics. Let's look at one kind of crime involving cars -- drunk driving. The following stats provide a picture of how stats drive insurance premiums.

Here's one link: http://visual.ly/united-states-drunk-driving-statistics

As shown above, the cost of male driving in this country is far higher than that of females, just from DUI arrest and conviction rates alone.

2. From a 1989 NYT article, before the days of computers, the Dept of Justice reported that drunk driving accounted for some 25,000 deaths per year, with and ADDITIONAL 500,000 people suffering from alcohol-related auto accidents at a cost then of near $12 billion. In California alone, third largest state with over 163,000,000 people, 75,000 people were arrested for drunk driving in 1989, 2,500 people killed and 65,000 were injured by drunk drivers. Near 50% of all car accidents are alcohol related and according to the U.S. Justice Department stats, 90% of those arrested for drunk driving are MALE. The CA Highway Patrol Annual Report of Fatal and Injury Motor Vehicle Traffic Accidents for 1987 said that of those jailed for fatal accidents resulting from drunk driving 84% were male. Of those jailed for injury in drunk driving accidents 84% were also male.

California's figures are not recent but they are relevant, since California seems to be the only state that has kept detailed crime summaries over the decades.

3. Here's a context link for overall crime by gender. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_crime

Overall, the FBI's stats show a context of male damage in this society that is incontrovertible. Insurance actuarials are in the business of studying this info. Numbers don't lie.

At least let your future OP's show an honest effort of research before you needlessly pick others' brains. At least go to the FBI links on crime by gender in this country.

You can see that men are not cost-effective. You can quit whining now.

[NickB79]

56. Because a lot of young men do really stupid shit in cars

Usually to impress their "bros" or young women.

For example:

And I say this as a man who did a lot of stupid shit in cars when he was younger

[ancianita]

59. And that's just the high visibility stuff. nt

[wandy]

61. It's a carry over from the 'dark days' of the horseless carriage.............

A primitive time when young men tended to favor large dangerous things that go fast.


In todays enlightened world young men or even old men choose safer more economicle rides.

Or NOT!

[pnwmom]

63. It isn't. n/t

[cbayer]

67. Do we really want our health insurance to be based on actuarial tables?

The whole point of getting universal health care is to provide to everyone regardless of risk factors, pre-existing conditions, etc.

Car insurance is a totally different animal and should be based on actuarial data, which clearly show that men, and young men in particular, are at higher risk.

[ancianita]

72. Actuarial tables and FBI crime stats are maps of reality. Knowing reality is a good thing.

Young men are not AT risk, they POSE risk for others as much as for themselves.

[cbayer]

81. Even more reason why they should pay more when it comes to car insurance, imo.

[ancianita]

84. Amen to that.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

77. i dont think it is fair but it is also not a good comparison to health insurance. nt

[Ohio Joe]

82. Well...

Men's car insurance is more expensive because it is a simple fact that men are more dangerous drivers... More likely to cause harm and death... Something we do, not because we have to but because we want to.

Women's health insurance cost more because they are more likely to take care of themselves and their health... Thus, they see their doctors more often... Something everyone should be doing.

The conclusion can only be that the costs of these two types of insurance are different because women are more likely to care about their own health and safety, as well as the health and safety of others more then men are.

Perhaps there is a lesson in all of this.

[Ilsa]

83. I suppose if younger guys' driving behavior

becomes as safe as young women's, their rates will go down.

[Kurska]

90. My driving record is fine, yet I still pay more.

That is why it is unfair. You are pre-judging people based on a variable beyond their control. I've seen statistics that say african americans get in more accidents per capita than whites. Now tell me, would it be fair to charge them more just because they are african american?

Of course not, I hope you see my point.

[Rex]

88. Based on data that states men are at a higher risk of being in a car accident?

Based on who gets pulled over for DWIs the most, maybe based on a few more things like that.

[procon]

89. Your argument is flawed.

You assert that, "The argument for higher rates is exactly the same in both cases." It is not.

As any actuarial table will show, a higher percentage of young men vs women tend to exercise bad judgment with regard to risky behaviors. As a consequence of their choices, they pay a higher premium for those poor decisions. The keyword is 'choice', and since women cannot choose the gender they are born with, they cannot be penalized for the natural and normal state of simply being female.

[Kurska]

93. Men can't choose the gender they are born with either, buddy.

Why is it fair I get punished for the behavior of other men?

[procon]

97. It's a matter of statistics, not gender.

Insurers look at numbers, not gender, to determine which groups represent higher risks; 'fairness' is not a factor.

Gender discrimination and other types of redlining based on race, religion, disability, or ethnic origin are illegal practices under federal law because they are discriminatory. The ACA reaffirmed that for women's healthcare.

[bluestate10]

94. Proven risk profiles.

Men are more aggressive drivers and cause the most accidents, serious and otherwise. A healthy woman who has no family genetic history of breast cancer is no more likely to get breast cancer than a man how has no family history of testicular cancer is likely to get breast cancer.

[Nine]

95. What are you asking us for?

And why the sudden interest in gender equality? (Not just you, everyone who's been making this argument lately)

Insurance companies have, unfortunately, been a law unto themselves. The ACA is helping change that, at least with regard to health insurance. I think we should all be glad of that, period. But it feels like some people can't be happy about it without asking, "but what's in it for me?"

I just wonder how many people talking about car insurance now have been interested in gender equality for insurance all along. Were you all as outraged when women were paying higher prices for their health insurance? Or is it only now that that injustice has been eliminated that you're suddenly very concerned about gender equality?

[Cleita]

101. It's not fair.

I don't think driver age should be a factor either. Risk should be leveraged out and everyone can pay the same price. During ones lifetime they will pass through all phases of risk to even it out. As far as gender, I find women can engage in as much lead footed risky driving behavior as men.

[Glassunion]

102. Simple answer... Because it's fair.

It's a simple factor. Men are shittier drivers. Men cost insurance companies more money.

Women getting healthcare is not like men getting auto insurance. Women cannot control their healthcare needs. Women are born with different bits that require more medical care.

However auto insurance is based on behavior and risk. You can jump up and down all you want, yelling from the rooftops how great of a driver you are, never had an accident, never a traffic ticket, and still pay more that that one female you know who has two accidents. That's just it... It's that one female you know. For that one female you know, there are likely three men making up for your good driving. When you start looking at the big picture, you will see that as a man you will most likely, in the long run, cost the insurance company more than that one female you mentioned. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1212281

As men we are far more likely to be drunk, reckless, careless or in attentive.

On one hand you have biology, and in the other you have behavior. You cannot compare the two and demand equality.

I'm saying this as a man... If you want equal rates, teach men as a whole to drive better.