|
|
|
|
|
by echubb
5577 days ago
|
|
This has to be one of the most ridiculous rulings I've ever heard. Statistically, male drivers are more dangerous, so why should women now subsidise this behaviour? It's pure ideological lawmaking, designed to show how egalitarian the EU is by in fact foisting a law upon its citizens which is completely disconnected from reality. In their attempt to achieve "equality" and "fairness," they've actually achieved neither - the two concepts are mutually exclusive in the insurance world. The whole concept of insurance, like life itself is predicated on inequality in the boolean algebraic sense of the word. It just proves how meddlesome the Eurocracy is becoming. Besides, where does it end ? It's likely now that male pension annuities, up till now cheaper than female ones, due to the earlier death of the average male will increase too.
That's not "fair," is it? |
|
As for the ruling itself, I don't see what's wrong with it. It's gender discrimination, and gender discrimination is (IMO rightly) unlawful. I have never been in a car accident, I'm a careful and relatively safe driver and I don't appreciate having to pay more just because I happen to be male.
I'm sure you can come up with statistics that show people of a certain ethnicity are more likely to be in an accident too, but insurance companies know that's a no-go. Discriminating by gender is exactly the same; it's based on something you are that you can't change, unlike driving experience and where you live which you can.