b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 10350361 (Thread)

# It depends on which 'facts' you choose to divide people
Why gender? Why not race, or religion?
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:40, archived)
# Muslim women should pay higher premiums because they can't see out their yashmaks.
Scientific fact.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:42, archived)
# Fuck yeah
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:45, archived)
# Ninja women see everything.
Chop socky fact.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:49, archived)
# Free insurance to otters.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:49, archived)
# Statistics prove they have a greater risk of driving their cars into a lake or river.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:32, archived)
# Not so!
There is not one documented case.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:40, archived)
# You are not privvy to OUR data files!
The way we weight our points system is beyond your Science and Understanding mere Mortal - DO NOT QUESTION OUR WAYS!

But we can assure you it's entirely fair and demographically, geographically and ottergraphically correct... in the loosest sense of the word correct.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:49, archived)
# Gender, age and postcode
are the main definers as to who makes a claim and for how much. If race or religion made a difference, you can be darned sure the insurance companies would take it into account.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 14:46, archived)
# Why gender?
Why am I lumped in with a category of everyone else who happens to have similar genitals to me?

The only reason they don't take race or religion into account is because it's illegal thanks to anti-discrimination laws. Otherwise you know they would.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:22, archived)
# It isn't my fault.
We are all lumped into catergories; it is how the world works. Our current government got about 30% of the vote, if that. So 70% were sold short. I don't like it any more than you do, but show me an alternative that works? Should insurance companies interview each applicant? How much extra would that cost?
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:30, archived)
# Well the ECJ has shown the way
By ruling that gender-based discrimination is not allowed, which I think is a step in the right direction.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:45, archived)
# It'll be age-based discrimination next, maybe.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 15:54, archived)
# Sounds fair enough to me
If it's your first time being insured you get charged a flat rate that goes up or down depending on your experience, claims and no claims. Why your gender, age, colour, creed etc should be a factor is beyond me.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 16:04, archived)
# Well.
If you are male you are more likely to make a claim. If you are under 25 you are more likely to make a claim. What business wouldn't take that into account? They would be stupid. Would you sell private health care to a rugby playing boxer with a 40 a day habit for the same price as a monk? You'd be mad!

edit: and skint in a week.
(, Tue 1 Mar 2011, 16:53, archived)