A nice example of something that ISN'T discrimination.
-
Soon insurance companies here will be not allowed to treat men and women differently. They were, amongst other things, giving women a lower insurance premium for life insurance because they live longer on average. That is, of course, completely fair. The statistics show that they live longer, therefore they have longer to pay the same expected amount, so smaller payments could be made. It just makes sense. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on gender or whatever, it's just statistics. EU is stupid. Discuss :)
-
Soon insurance companies here will be not allowed to treat men and women differently. They were, amongst other things, giving women a lower insurance premium for life insurance because they live longer on average. That is, of course, completely fair. The statistics show that they live longer, therefore they have longer to pay the same expected amount, so smaller payments could be made. It just makes sense. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on gender or whatever, it's just statistics. EU is stupid. Discuss :)
They also have lower car insurance. Also, if you want to be fair, you would have to lower the prize money at Wimbledon, for women only play 3 sets not 5.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC League Table Link CCC Link[^]
-
Soon insurance companies here will be not allowed to treat men and women differently. They were, amongst other things, giving women a lower insurance premium for life insurance because they live longer on average. That is, of course, completely fair. The statistics show that they live longer, therefore they have longer to pay the same expected amount, so smaller payments could be made. It just makes sense. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on gender or whatever, it's just statistics. EU is stupid. Discuss :)
Do women have to pay more for health insurance? Here women pay more because they have a vagina otherwise known as a pre-existing condition. I love how civilized people better themselves by taking advantage of other people's problems. :sigh:
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
Soon insurance companies here will be not allowed to treat men and women differently. They were, amongst other things, giving women a lower insurance premium for life insurance because they live longer on average. That is, of course, completely fair. The statistics show that they live longer, therefore they have longer to pay the same expected amount, so smaller payments could be made. It just makes sense. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on gender or whatever, it's just statistics. EU is stupid. Discuss :)
-
Soon insurance companies here will be not allowed to treat men and women differently. They were, amongst other things, giving women a lower insurance premium for life insurance because they live longer on average. That is, of course, completely fair. The statistics show that they live longer, therefore they have longer to pay the same expected amount, so smaller payments could be made. It just makes sense. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on gender or whatever, it's just statistics. EU is stupid. Discuss :)
While I agree with you in principle (that it's perfectly fair to allow companies to vary their prices for men/women based on statistics) I can see a a slippery slope if this continues. In the not to distant future genetic testing is going to become mainstream. When that happens will insurance companies be allowed to require your genetic profile and make decisions based on that. They could start charging higher premiums if you have a genetic pre-disposition to heart disease. (The fact you are male or female is down to your genes, so what's the difference?) Is that acceptable? I think there is a careful line to be drawn between these cases.
Simon
-
While I agree with you in principle (that it's perfectly fair to allow companies to vary their prices for men/women based on statistics) I can see a a slippery slope if this continues. In the not to distant future genetic testing is going to become mainstream. When that happens will insurance companies be allowed to require your genetic profile and make decisions based on that. They could start charging higher premiums if you have a genetic pre-disposition to heart disease. (The fact you are male or female is down to your genes, so what's the difference?) Is that acceptable? I think there is a careful line to be drawn between these cases.
Simon
Why wouldn't that be acceptable? If your risk is higher, you pay more. I happen to come from a family with a lot of heart problems, so I would probably end up paying more. Seems fair to me. And even if it wouldn't be fair, how is this discrimination? This is "product" (calling insurance a product is stupid, but I didn't start it) differentiation based on actual facts, not on prejudice..
-
Why wouldn't that be acceptable? If your risk is higher, you pay more. I happen to come from a family with a lot of heart problems, so I would probably end up paying more. Seems fair to me. And even if it wouldn't be fair, how is this discrimination? This is "product" (calling insurance a product is stupid, but I didn't start it) differentiation based on actual facts, not on prejudice..
harold aptroot wrote:
If your risk is higher, you pay more.
But how does that risk profile work? Particularly with genetics we aren't yet at a clear point where we can define which genes "cause" heart disease. Unless you can have a clear cut measure that indicates increased risk I think it's a cloudy area. What about those who don't want to get a genetic profile? Will they be forced to? It's certainly not possible to get insurance right now without disclosing your gender. (Don't get me wrong, I agree with you here, I agree this is factual and not discriminatory)
Simon
-
harold aptroot wrote:
If your risk is higher, you pay more.
But how does that risk profile work? Particularly with genetics we aren't yet at a clear point where we can define which genes "cause" heart disease. Unless you can have a clear cut measure that indicates increased risk I think it's a cloudy area. What about those who don't want to get a genetic profile? Will they be forced to? It's certainly not possible to get insurance right now without disclosing your gender. (Don't get me wrong, I agree with you here, I agree this is factual and not discriminatory)
Simon
Well, I'm not sure how clear cut their measures are now.. some of the questions they ask seem pretty weird :) As for those who don't want to get a genetic profile, I assume they'll be paying the maximum amount? For two reasons: 1) There is a significant chance that they're trying to hide something. 2) You get more profit out of those who refuse for political reasons. Or maybe they'll just be refused, for non-compliance with corporate policy.