5 ms·
So (assuming males are more costly to insure) either (a) females pay more than they should and are effectively subsidizing males or (b) males pay less than they
by reader5000 10y ago
So (assuming males are more costly to insure) either (a) females pay more than they should and are effectively subsidizing males or (b) males pay less than they should and the insurance companies will go broke..
- beejiu 10y agoOn the other hand, we didn't choose to have high levels of testosterone in our bodies.
- rahimnathwani 10y agoOr (c) insurance companies still make positive returns on both male and female customers, and the regulation just reduces their overall profits without creating losses which must be subsidized by female customers.
- mvindahl 10y ago(d) Insurance companies increase insurance premiums for every customer not in the young male demographic, blames "regulation". Results skyrocket. Management awards themselves seven digit raises to "keep attracting the best talent".
- NotSureYet 10y agoIt's OK because we subsidize their Health Care: men and women pay the same for the same age, but women use way more than men.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Ntrails 10y agoYes, female premiums went up to cover the cost of not having that factor in the model. Fortunately I'm sure people are hard at work finding "proxy factors" which happen to map to pretty well gender but have an acceptable parallel explanation for why they're meaningfully descriptive of an applicants risk profile :)