|
On November 23 2010 10:54 Fa1nT wrote:
They do the same with age, problem? Statistically, male and females, Young and old, have different rates of accidents, and thus should be charged separately.
The same way,statistically, females are more likely to perform worse at certain jobs yet you can be sued if you hire a male over a female or pay males more.
|
All the statistic sites only seem to have fatal accidents and not accidents in general. I hate arguments like this without actual numbers to look at.
|
I've ALWAYS agreed that this was a bullshit move to make more money for nothing from the eyes of the insurance companies, and why I'm glad a couple places are saying "The longer you are with us without a claim, the less you pay". For me, I've only had two speeding tickets since I started driving (Both in the first couple years of driving...) and being twenty five, I am still paying WAY more than a woman driving the same car as me.
If more places offered more aggressive "No Claim, less pay" system, I'd be happy.
|
It's pretty shitty that this sorta stuff still happens. But meh? what can you do?
It does make sense though from a business perspective. Statistically speaking I would think men are more likely to have car accidents, etc, because we are more inclined to do silly things behind the wheel.
|
On March 02 2011 10:49 Craton wrote:
All the statistic sites only seem to have fatal accidents and not accidents in general. I hate arguments like this without actual numbers to look at.
Well if you're looking for accidents a year that number is 5-7 times higher then the 33k avg in the USA, you can look at claims data but not all accidents are reported and it depends what you count, i'm pretty sure all fatal accidents are.
On March 02 2011 10:43 ExoD wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 10:54 Fa1nT wrote:
They do the same with age, problem? Statistically, male and females, Young and old, have different rates of accidents, and thus should be charged separately. The same way,statistically, females are more likely to perform worse at certain jobs yet you can be sued if you hire a male over a female or pay males more.
Not if the company is privately held, that's also only turning them down because they are a woman, car insurance takes in many factors just because sex and age group are only some of them doesn't make it inherently sexiest or ageist, they have solid stats backing up their decision. Just like the factor in your income, your car, how many miles you drive etc.
|
On March 02 2011 10:49 Craton wrote:
All the statistic sites only seem to have fatal accidents and not accidents in general. I hate arguments like this without actual numbers to look at.
Yeah, unfortunately, it's in the interest of insurance companies to not let the data go completely public. When accidents get reported, they get reported to the companies, but the companies don't want to release any information.
Otherwise, someone reasonably skilled at math could do some quick calculations of their own, and suddenly realize, "Hey, I'm getting ripped off like mad..." The companies basically have to take advantage of the disparity in knowledge between them and the general public.
And for the job-related argument a couple posts up, can you give some examples of jobs where women are proven to be worse workers? You don't need to rigorously cite anything, but it should definitely be objective. For accident rates, you have nothing but numbers, so there's no room for qualitative bias. When you're analyzing ability at a job, though, most of the time it is evaluated qualitatively.
|
On March 02 2011 10:05 Mentalizor wrote:
I'm sure this has already been mentioned. But tons of clubs do this all the time.
A bar/club in Copenhagen is infamous for entry and free drinks for women costing only 60dkk (around 8€, I guess it's around 11$) and the same to men is 360dkk (around 42€ and guess around 66$).
It's pretty smart. Alot of girls will ofc enter, since they can have a cheap night out. And the guys will pay just to get a chance to get with all the girls. The bar has been pulled to court several times, and have been forced to pay a fine of only a few thousand dkk (800-1200€ - 1100-1600$). That's less than they will make in a single evening just by pulling this off. The danish system clearly states that sexual harrassment can lead to (up to) 25.000dkk fines (8000€ - 11000$) fines and/or employees to get fired. But since no staff is feeling harrassed they can only fine. And since no "real" sexual "damage" has been done (ppl aren't exactly walking away crying) they can in no way pull off the big fees.
Now, the manager of the place has publicly admitted to do this (to get girls in cheap, so the guys will pay the party), since that's how nature work. You couldn't do it the other way around. And if everyone were to pay 220dkk (20€+ - 28$+) there would be enough girls - end as a result - not enough guys. And besides, guys are more likely to actually benefit from the free drinks.
Thoughts on this?
Who is dumb enough to go to such a place? And who spends 42 euros on a drink? You can invite a friend or two and go out eating in a restaurant for that kind of money. Well if he does that too often doesn't the place get shut down?
|
Even though its based on statistics why should it still be allowed? What if they found for example Japanese drivers crashed more often than American drivers. Would a company discriminate of race even if it was statistically proven? No way. Why allow it for gender?
|
On March 02 2011 11:11 DTK-m2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 10:49 Craton wrote:
All the statistic sites only seem to have fatal accidents and not accidents in general. I hate arguments like this without actual numbers to look at. Yeah, unfortunately, it's in the interest of insurance companies to not let the data go completely public. When accidents get reported, they get reported to the companies, but the companies don't want to release any information. Otherwise, someone reasonably skilled at math could do some quick calculations of their own, and suddenly realize, "Hey, I'm getting ripped off like mad..." The companies basically have to take advantage of the disparity in knowledge between them and the general public. And for the job-related argument a couple posts up, can you give some examples of jobs where women are proven to be worse workers? You don't need to rigorously cite anything, but it should definitely be objective. For accident rates, you have nothing but numbers, so there's no room for qualitative bias. When you're analyzing ability at a job, though, most of the time it is evaluated qualitatively.
Women off leave to have children and take long, paid maternity leave. Making them far less efficient to employ cost-wise.
Men have also been show to be better at certain things like abstract thinking (according to a psychologist house mate), so for certain jobs shouldn't men be favoured? (And for other jobs women are more suited due to them being better at certain other tasks).
No, because we shouldn't discriminate like that. Even if being male makes you more likely to crash, it's still discriminatory. We don't discriminate against disabled people because it might cost us more to install some ramps or something. Its the principle.
It's doesn't help equality of the sexes either in my opinion by giving one side special treatment.
|
On March 02 2011 11:12 luckybeni2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 10:05 Mentalizor wrote:
I'm sure this has already been mentioned. But tons of clubs do this all the time.
A bar/club in Copenhagen is infamous for entry and free drinks for women costing only 60dkk (around 8€, I guess it's around 11$) and the same to men is 360dkk (around 42€ and guess around 66$).
It's pretty smart. Alot of girls will ofc enter, since they can have a cheap night out. And the guys will pay just to get a chance to get with all the girls. The bar has been pulled to court several times, and have been forced to pay a fine of only a few thousand dkk (800-1200€ - 1100-1600$). That's less than they will make in a single evening just by pulling this off. The danish system clearly states that sexual harrassment can lead to (up to) 25.000dkk fines (8000€ - 11000$) fines and/or employees to get fired. But since no staff is feeling harrassed they can only fine. And since no "real" sexual "damage" has been done (ppl aren't exactly walking away crying) they can in no way pull off the big fees.
Now, the manager of the place has publicly admitted to do this (to get girls in cheap, so the guys will pay the party), since that's how nature work. You couldn't do it the other way around. And if everyone were to pay 220dkk (20€+ - 28$+) there would be enough girls - end as a result - not enough guys. And besides, guys are more likely to actually benefit from the free drinks.
Thoughts on this? Who is dumb enough to go to such a place? And who spends 42 euros on a drink? You can invite a friend or two and go out eating in a restaurant for that kind of money. Well if he does that too often doesn't the place get shut down?
3 things...
1: It's not for A drink. It's for free drinks all night.
2: The price level in Denmark is through the roof -.-
3: Well the authorities can't shut down the place, since it's only doing minor legal fractions. Like a restaurant being busted in not cleaning the plates or something. I guess it's just using a glitch in the danish legalsystem.
...Oh... And I've actually never been to this place. A bunch of my friends were though. They say there's so many ppl in there - and such bad service - that there's NO way you can actually get drinks for anywhere near what you paid to enter - if you're a guy
|
On November 23 2010 10:54 Fa1nT wrote:
They do the same with age, problem? Statistically, male and females, young and old, have different rates of accidents, and thus should be charged separately.
If you look at it that way you could probably find different accident/speeding rates between different races also, but it doesnt mean they should be charged separately. It pisses me off when I havent had an accident ever and no tickets in about 7-8 years but I still have to pay more than a couple female friends who have been shittier drivers than me.
|
On March 02 2011 11:12 luckybeni2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 10:05 Mentalizor wrote:
I'm sure this has already been mentioned. But tons of clubs do this all the time.
A bar/club in Copenhagen is infamous for entry and free drinks for women costing only 60dkk (around 8€, I guess it's around 11$) and the same to men is 360dkk (around 42€ and guess around 66$).
It's pretty smart. Alot of girls will ofc enter, since they can have a cheap night out. And the guys will pay just to get a chance to get with all the girls. The bar has been pulled to court several times, and have been forced to pay a fine of only a few thousand dkk (800-1200€ - 1100-1600$). That's less than they will make in a single evening just by pulling this off. The danish system clearly states that sexual harrassment can lead to (up to) 25.000dkk fines (8000€ - 11000$) fines and/or employees to get fired. But since no staff is feeling harrassed they can only fine. And since no "real" sexual "damage" has been done (ppl aren't exactly walking away crying) they can in no way pull off the big fees.
Now, the manager of the place has publicly admitted to do this (to get girls in cheap, so the guys will pay the party), since that's how nature work. You couldn't do it the other way around. And if everyone were to pay 220dkk (20€+ - 28$+) there would be enough girls - end as a result - not enough guys. And besides, guys are more likely to actually benefit from the free drinks.
Thoughts on this? Who is dumb enough to go to such a place? And who spends 42 euros on a drink? You can invite a friend or two and go out eating in a restaurant for that kind of money. Well if he does that too often doesn't the place get shut down?
Is this real? 42 for a drink?!?! My local is £0.50 - £1 per pint.
|
i drive a sports car. i've never had an accident, i'm experienced in track racing and auto x. i've had many close encounters on the freeway and were able to avoid it thanks to my experience in driving and lack of trust of other drivers (ie. i suspect all cars around me as potential car changing lane without looking).
my insurance is high because of other idiots driving the same car as me get into accidents.
i think this is more unfair than women vs men.
|
On March 02 2011 10:33 Lamphead wrote:
as a person who is studying to work in the field of insurance, this argument seems really silly, and I believe that if men are statistically more accident-expensive, then they should shoulder higher premiums. Insurance companies look for ways to discern the risk level of crashing..risk is not sexist..
The issue is about what is allowable as a deciding factor.
If you look at it simply, you have lots of variables:
Age of driver.
Race of driver.
Sex of driver.
Location of car.
Length of license.
Car.
etc etc.
All of these could be used as risk factors. Not all of them are (race being excluded).
The issue isn't "does this impact accident risk?" the issue is "while this is a variable, are we going to let it be used for discrimination?" and the answer is no.
Equally there would be the potential to say that giving different premiums based on age is a bad thing, since that's age discrimination, but it has been decided that age discrimination is acceptable, and while sex discrimination used to be acceptable, it no longer is. Simple as.
Whether women do or do not have less accidents doesn't matter, the simple fact is that they have decided it's unacceptable to decide your insurance risk level based on your sex, just like you can't judge it based on race.
You can still continue to discriminate based on other things though, such as age.
|
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On March 02 2011 11:16 Mitchlew wrote:
Even though its based on statistics why should it still be allowed? What if they found for example Japanese drivers crashed more often than American drivers. Would a company discriminate of race even if it was statistically proven? No way. Why allow it for gender?
The problem is that the motor insurance industry, particularly in Europe, is currently not profitable due to Bodily Injury Claims Inflation and Insurance Fraud. Another dimension to the problem is that comparison websites allow people to quickly and easily compare prices and can 'tweak' data for their insurance quotes by seeing what combination of personal details lower prices on these quote websites. For instance, first time drivers may use details such as their parent's home address to achieve reduced premiums. These issues force down the profitability margins for insurance companies while driving up their reserve ratios.
Because of this, insurers have to use any and all available data that they can get in order to model risk liability. Anything that shows a demonstrable link to risk will be priced in accordingly if the insurance company can do so. It wouldn't matter if the factor was gender, age, postcode, type of car, etc.; if the insurer can price this issue into their model they will.
It's a pretty topical issue. If you're interested in this, I'd recommend reading research in this area. A few good papers would be those written by The Actuarial Profession Working Party, Deloitte and Pricewaterhouse Coopers.
|
On March 02 2011 11:26 Deadeight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 11:12 luckybeni2 wrote:On March 02 2011 10:05 Mentalizor wrote:
I'm sure this has already been mentioned. But tons of clubs do this all the time.
A bar/club in Copenhagen is infamous for entry and free drinks for women costing only 60dkk (around 8€, I guess it's around 11$) and the same to men is 360dkk (around 42€ and guess around 66$).
It's pretty smart. Alot of girls will ofc enter, since they can have a cheap night out. And the guys will pay just to get a chance to get with all the girls. The bar has been pulled to court several times, and have been forced to pay a fine of only a few thousand dkk (800-1200€ - 1100-1600$). That's less than they will make in a single evening just by pulling this off. The danish system clearly states that sexual harrassment can lead to (up to) 25.000dkk fines (8000€ - 11000$) fines and/or employees to get fired. But since no staff is feeling harrassed they can only fine. And since no "real" sexual "damage" has been done (ppl aren't exactly walking away crying) they can in no way pull off the big fees.
Now, the manager of the place has publicly admitted to do this (to get girls in cheap, so the guys will pay the party), since that's how nature work. You couldn't do it the other way around. And if everyone were to pay 220dkk (20€+ - 28$+) there would be enough girls - end as a result - not enough guys. And besides, guys are more likely to actually benefit from the free drinks.
Thoughts on this? Who is dumb enough to go to such a place? And who spends 42 euros on a drink? You can invite a friend or two and go out eating in a restaurant for that kind of money. Well if he does that too often doesn't the place get shut down? Is this real? 42 for a drink?!?! My local is £0.50 - £1 per pint.
Wow seriously? On the local bar (that's really bad and for drunks) the cheapest beer I can get is 26dkk (around 3,50€) for half a liter... In regular bars it's more like 40-50dkk (6-7€)
|
Fact: Women live longer then men.
Thus, if they buy a life insurance, you would expect them to pay less premiums because they live longer. How is pricing from a fact discriminating. You have proven statistics behind this.
Same with auto insurance. Severity for an accident tends to be higher if the driver was male. Hence, they should pay more.
The sad part, is say, you do like Europe and prevent insurers from pricing using gender. Then sad part is everybody will end up paying more. Yes, men may pay slightly less, but in aggregate, premiums should be higher because the uncertainty is greater.
|
On March 02 2011 11:12 luckybeni2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 10:05 Mentalizor wrote:
I'm sure this has already been mentioned. But tons of clubs do this all the time.
A bar/club in Copenhagen is infamous for entry and free drinks for women costing only 60dkk (around 8€, I guess it's around 11$) and the same to men is 360dkk (around 42€ and guess around 66$).
It's pretty smart. Alot of girls will ofc enter, since they can have a cheap night out. And the guys will pay just to get a chance to get with all the girls. The bar has been pulled to court several times, and have been forced to pay a fine of only a few thousand dkk (800-1200€ - 1100-1600$). That's less than they will make in a single evening just by pulling this off. The danish system clearly states that sexual harrassment can lead to (up to) 25.000dkk fines (8000€ - 11000$) fines and/or employees to get fired. But since no staff is feeling harrassed they can only fine. And since no "real" sexual "damage" has been done (ppl aren't exactly walking away crying) they can in no way pull off the big fees.
Now, the manager of the place has publicly admitted to do this (to get girls in cheap, so the guys will pay the party), since that's how nature work. You couldn't do it the other way around. And if everyone were to pay 220dkk (20€+ - 28$+) there would be enough girls - end as a result - not enough guys. And besides, guys are more likely to actually benefit from the free drinks.
Thoughts on this? Who is dumb enough to go to such a place? And who spends 42 euros on a drink? You can invite a friend or two and go out eating in a restaurant for that kind of money. Well if he does that too often doesn't the place get shut down?
Men
penis
females
Enough reasoning and excuse for some guys.
Seriously though, 42 for guys...that better be one hell of a club and it better have some fine people
|
11 Posts
Those who get into accidents are already charged more so why would you want to charge every member of a certain gender more simply based on their gender, whether or not they have accidents?
sources: women get paid less
relevant discussion: quit acting like an entitled baby because they pay 10 bucks a month less on car insurance
Childish argument. Women who work the same hours, have the same experience and the same education get paid the same. Those have less of the above get paid less.
If you think insurance costs should be based on income then why not just base it off income instead off of gender?
|
Bleh...there is a lot of sexism against women on the internet. It is like racism in 18th century France.
But sexism against men is going to rise without a doubt. Now, women are going to college in larger numbers and there are more work at home dads which makes women the bread winners of the family.
Stuff like this is going to happen more and more as time goes on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
