4 ms·

> Because tickets aren't just monetary And the only monetary aspect is not the fine, it is the also the increased insurance premiums. The latter can be much mo

> Because tickets aren't just monetary And the only monetary aspect is not the fine, it is the also the increased insurance premiums. The latter can be much more punishing than the former.

judge2020 6y ago
I didn't know this was a thing in the US until a few months ago - apparently the local police notify insurance companies (somehow) of speeding violations and thus give the insurance reason to increase your premiums.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  If the goal is to charge people who take actions that result in higher probability of losses, then it makes sense. Otherwise, drivers that have less probability to cause losses are subsidizing those that do. Also, in the US as far as I know, you can “fight” the ticket in court and pay the local government more to reduce the level of speeding ticket and hence points you get, so that the insurance company doesn’t see any speeding (or sees less severe speeding).
  - loeg 6y ago
    > If the goal is to charge people who take actions that result in higher probability of losses, then it makes sense. Otherwise, drivers that have less probability to cause losses are subsidizing those that do. It's a noisy and weak signal.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      It it was not a good signal, then a competing auto insurance company would advertise that it does not penalize speeding drivers and win more business.
      - loeg 6y ago
        This is a false dichotomy. It can be noisy and weak without being a competitive disadvantage for the insurance business.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        How can it not be a competitive disadvantage? Auto insurance profit margins are very low, and I’m sure the actuaries have access to plenty of data about losses correlated with speeding. If a speeding ticket did not result in higher losses (probabilistically, not in specific individual cases of course), then a person with a speeding ticket should be able to find cheaper insurance. The other option is there’s highly qualified people who are decent enough at math to operate insurance companies, but not decent enough to realize they are mispricing an obvious variable.
        loeg 6y ago
        You're not arguing against a statement I've made.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        Then I’m unsure what you mean by “noisy and weak” signal if it does not lead to a mispriced insurance product.
- brewdad 6y ago
  They aren't notifying insurance companies. The violation becomes a part of your driving record and the insurance companies pull this information at regular intervals that can vary by company.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    That's the same thing, just in a different part of the process. Why does the insurance company get access to your driving record, which ideally is confidential between you and the state? Corporate lobbying making laws that give select companies access to everyone's driving records?

> Because tickets aren't just monetary And the only monetary aspect is not the fine, it is the also the increased insurance premiums. The latter can be much more punishing than the former.

judge2020 6y ago

I didn't know this was a thing in the US until a few months ago - apparently the local police notify insurance companies (somehow) of speeding violations and thus give the insurance reason to increase your premiums.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
If the goal is to charge people who take actions that result in higher probability of losses, then it makes sense. Otherwise, drivers that have less probability to cause losses are subsidizing those that do. Also, in the US as far as I know, you can “fight” the ticket in court and pay the local government more to reduce the level of speeding ticket and hence points you get, so that the insurance company doesn’t see any speeding (or sees less severe speeding).
- loeg 6y ago
  > If the goal is to charge people who take actions that result in higher probability of losses, then it makes sense. Otherwise, drivers that have less probability to cause losses are subsidizing those that do. It's a noisy and weak signal.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    It it was not a good signal, then a competing auto insurance company would advertise that it does not penalize speeding drivers and win more business.
    - loeg 6y ago
      This is a false dichotomy. It can be noisy and weak without being a competitive disadvantage for the insurance business.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        How can it not be a competitive disadvantage? Auto insurance profit margins are very low, and I’m sure the actuaries have access to plenty of data about losses correlated with speeding. If a speeding ticket did not result in higher losses (probabilistically, not in specific individual cases of course), then a person with a speeding ticket should be able to find cheaper insurance. The other option is there’s highly qualified people who are decent enough at math to operate insurance companies, but not decent enough to realize they are mispricing an obvious variable.
        loeg 6y ago
        You're not arguing against a statement I've made.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        Then I’m unsure what you mean by “noisy and weak” signal if it does not lead to a mispriced insurance product.
brewdad 6y ago
They aren't notifying insurance companies. The violation becomes a part of your driving record and the insurance companies pull this information at regular intervals that can vary by company.
- judge2020 6y ago
  That's the same thing, just in a different part of the process. Why does the insurance company get access to your driving record, which ideally is confidential between you and the state? Corporate lobbying making laws that give select companies access to everyone's driving records?