"Nate" <nhzero@removeifnotspam.yahoo.com> wrote
C wrote

The rule applies to teenage boys and girls, too.

But--
1.
IIRC, the gender insurance rate disparity goes down as age rises.

2.
Also, IIRC the disparity between teenage boys and girls has been decreasing in
the last decade or so. Girls are taking more risks on the road (and off,
arguably). Kinda like they're probably achieving more sports injuries than a few
decades ago. (Hmm)

You are claiming, in large part, that people who drive more miles per year will
have higher insurance rates. Of course. I have no dispute with this.

But I am claiming that, for the same miles per year and same ages for Woman X
and Man Y, on average the woman will pay less. (I presume married couples where
the man does most of the driving report that he does most of the driving.)

You're also arguing that the accident rate varies depending on whether its
"around town" driving or long trip/vacation driving. I'd be guessing as to which
results in more accidents per mile. I thought it was "around town," but I could
be wrong. One can probably google and nail this little statistic.

I see you complaining about how women drive, with exceptions (fair enough).
We're just exchanging anecdotes here, so I'll toss in my own: The most dangerous
drivers in any area in which I have lived have by far been young men. Leaping
from stoplights with a squeal. Speeding. Abrupt stops from high speed. Hanging
out the car windows and yelling nonsense.

Then there is, IMO, a nature or nurture conditioning of men to be more
aggressive. Not all men. But on average. I do suspect this translates to higher
car accident rates. The greater aggression has its pros, too. E.g. if there's
another genocide, I want the strongest, most aggressive people fighting on my
behalf. Or, if some guy were harassing me, I'd want a big old linebacker husband
without a soft touch to put him in his place (within the law).

So you have your data collection. I have mine. When I see a car weaving,
speeding, etc. on the road, I put some distance between him and me. And it is
almost always a he.

Also, I see you claiming that people who are rear-ended should carry more blame
than the law currently provides. I can't believe the courts or insurers are that
messed up.

We mostly disagree.

Nice try Nate. I totally agree that statistics can be misleading but don't
you think that insurance companies have enough smarts to understand
statistics way better than either you or I could even imagine? That's their
business.

Fred

Studies have borne out in Florida that while

"Having themselves rearended"?.....I've never heard that term before.

Rear-end collisions are caused by tailgating. Tailgating is rampant.
Many drivers are impatient, always want to go faster. They don't care
about the risk.

At work, everybody is a paragon of safety. They are fussy about the
company following safety rules and indignant if slight dangers appear
that could be blamed on the company. On the road, the same people are
cutthroats, ignoring speed limits, amber lights, and following
distance.

The cops don't care. They say, let the insurance sort it out.

Too bad for you, though, if you are one of the folks who obeys the
speed limit or might find yourself in an unfamiliar situation and slow
down to figure it out, and you get rear-ended by some type A idiot.