Worthy of debate

[Knot_Sharpe]

As a fellow Canadian, I gotta say you should know better than asking that question and equating it to racial profiling, for Christ's sake!

Why do our smokes cost about a million bucks a pack?
Why does our liquor cost about a million bucks a bottle?
Why do our prescriptions cost about a million bucks a pill?
Shall I go on?

Taxes?
GSfuckingT?

Better start car-pooling with sis!!

 

[Dr.M]

Thats how insurance works though, its all based on statistics, you pay for someone elses accidents. If you screw up then your rate also goes up.

Some used to offer college/good grades etc discounts, not in California anymore.

 

[bigguns7]

First off, insurers are beginning to slowly realize that the risk gap between males and females is quickly slimming. They have been moving in the last ten years toward evening the playing field.

Secondly, if you are on your own policy independent of your parents, you will be paying alot more than your sister who is under your parents policy. Your parents could have multi-line, multi-car, loyalty, and other discounts that you don't get.

Lastly, if your rates are five times more than your 16 year old sister's and you're still under your parents policy and you have a clean record, you need to shop around.

 

[Prometheus]

So why do I pay five times as much for car insurance than my sister for who has been driving for one year?

Because you have no choice.

The Government's greatest talent is knowing how to screw you, and there are few lobbies more powerful and embedded within government than the insurance lobby.

 

[mattcanning99]

As a fellow Canadian, I gotta say you should know better than asking that question and equating it to racial profiling, for Christ's sake!

I disagree. How is this not the same as racial profiling? It's sexual profiling. Taking statistics which prove a certain gender is known to do something more often and punishing the entire group for it.

It's the exact same thing.

ps - If insurance companies could prove women caused more accidents, the rates would be equal because our PC society would never allow women to pay more for car insurance. It's a prejudice towards men which society accepts, even welcomes with open arms.

Statistics could prove a certain race causing more accidents than another one, even if by 1%, but you would never see them set rates to entire races. It's the same damn thing.

 

[HappyScrappy]

this post is like you running around yelling "I AM WRONG - LOOK AT ME!!! I'M WRONG!! OVER HERE!! LOOK - WRONG!!! RIGHT HERE - LOOK!!!"

bad logic + incorrect facts = what? it equals wrong. which is what you are.

you are close - but not quite.

you take an incorrect assumption and then draw bad conclusions from it that have no backing since the first assumption is incorrect.

If you learn more about the process, as someone up there already stated - they are looking at total percent damage in terms of the monitary costs to them as a company.
and I assure you that if they saw someone else was costing them more, they would charge them more as well. it is retarded business sense to do otherwise.

by your arguement, rich white males driving expensive cars should have no insurance whatsoever b/c rich white males are who dominate the government and ceo base of our world.

 

[Bullit]

they have cars in Canada?

We just got them. I prefer the term 'horseless carriage' tho.