[throwaway0a5e]

If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose? Why not just squirrel the money away in some sort of HSA-esque fund and cut out the expensive middleman entity? If the state is gonna make me pay for mandatory coverage why not just do it with taxes and have one less set of predatory companies trying to screw me?

[bkberry352]

Even with perfect information about the past/present, there is still uncertainty which can be insured against. Current models are nowhere near precise enough, and probably will never get there (self-driving cars will replace the need for insurance at the individual driver level before we have perfect models of driving risk)

[ghaff]

How could there be certainty? Even a good driver can skid on ice or get hit by an uninsured driver running a light.

[bkberry352]

Indeed, how could there? There is inherent uncertainty to the future which cannot be known, and thus there is risk which can be insured against

[throwaway0a5e]

If internet comments are any indication you just adopt a circular definition of "good driver" where all those things disqualify one from being a good driver.

[mbg721]

At least in Ohio, you can put some amount of money on deposit with the state as a substitute for buying auto insurance.

[missedthecue]

Some level of car insurance is mandated by law in every state. Might as well make it as cheap as possible for yourself.

Additionally, many people can barely afford their car. It's crazy how many people are driving around in a car worth more than their annual salary. $60,000 vehicles and such, especially trucks. It would take them a while to "self insure" against the risk of totalling that.

[throwaway0a5e]

I was thinking more about the people driving $2k-$5k cars.

The last thing they need is their insurer jacking their rates because they're ending too many trips in bad zip codes.

You can "incentivize them onto public transit" all you want but most of those people would already be on public transit if there was even a $40/mo difference.

[anonymouse008]

> The last thing they need is their insurer jacking their rates because they're ending too many trips in bad zip codes.

Wait, the 'data' is based on ending a trip in a bad zip code!?

Man, and I'm over here thinking they map all the drivers over time and place to see who is normally on the road with each other, then basing those factors on courteousness and abilities with ambiguity.

[throwaway0a5e]

>Wait, the 'data' is based on ending a trip in a bad zip code!?

These companies use cell phone and/or OBD2 data. The only reason they haven't changed your rate based on the fact that you go to a strip club or shopping at Walmart is because there hasn't been a business justification for operating on that level of detail yet.

Insurers have long used proxies for wealth in order to set rates. If your zip code is the hood you're gonna pay premiums like everyone else in the hood. The only difference is that now they'll have more detail so the guy who registers his truck to his apartment in the hood but is on the road 5day/wk for work will pay based on two days of ending trips in the hood and five days of whatever motel he's in happens to be.

>Man, and I'm over here thinking they map all the drivers over time and place to see who is normally on the road with each other, then basing those factors on courteousness and abilities with ambiguity.

They might be doing that too if it happens to be worthwhile for their business.

[esel2k]

I have already such a tracker in my car that connects to the OBD2 and has its own 3G or 4G chip. I have an app and can track where my car is and could do some stats. Why did I get it for free? It was a joint deal between the insurance and the car garage and they probably can see where I drive - the garage wanted me to do all maintenance in their garage and the sensor/app company offered me to be my car insurance. So also the dealer or garage will be interested to know where you do your car maintenance. All in all I should probably take it out but I see a little benefit and do not care about that amount of data that I share (any cellphone manufacturer will have a million more data points).

[ixacto]

New Hampshire doesn’t require car insurance. https://www.thehartford.com/aarp/car-insurance/new-hampshire...

[lardo]

live free or die

[icedistilled]

There would be some good reasons, for example regulations could mandate that only factors that one can change and are most directly related to driving are valid for the rate setting. i.e. field of employment or income cannot be used but speeding, hard breaking, cell phone use while driving, and other unsafe behaviors would be.

[finnthehuman]

>If the premiums approach being sufficiently fine grained as to account for individual risk then what's the purpose?

It doesn't matter if there is a purpose when so many states mandate that you buy the product anyway.