Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarnauga
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
ITT people confuse correlation and causality
Men have more accidents than women, it doesn't mean that they have more accidents because they're men.
If an insurance company makes you pay more just because you're a guy, you're being screwed
|
How is that exactly? My testosterone and other sex characteristics verifiably predispose me to risky and reckless behavior, which is something that has been demonstrated scientifically. The fact that my cognitive abilities and temperament keep that elevated risk under control and negate it doesn't matter; the insurance company doesn't know I'm level-headed, and actuaries have no realistic way to model that (except stuff like my age and GPA).
Correlation is sufficient for this kind of judgment. Who cares why increasing age signals a reduced likelihood of accidents? The insurance company just needs to know that it does, so they can peg my rates to my aggregate risk.
Conceptually, paying more because you are a guy is no different than paying less because you have a safe driving record, a safe car, good grades, elevated age, etc. They are all valid indicators of risk.