What is currently legal to do and what is "right" to do are two different things. GP was talking about what "should" be. Of course, a lot of that is opinion that is up for debate.
I personally agree. I think charging males more (for example) was only done because we had no way of getting more individualized data. It is all very crude and probably will be an outdated concept in 20 years.
*It is illegal to discriminate based on sex for auto insurance purposes in many countries as well as Montana. Insurance companies in most US states take your credit score into consideration (if you don't pay your credit card bill you pay more for car insurance) but this practice is illegal in a handful of states. Massachusetts is one of them, if I recall correctly.
I personally agree. I think charging males more (for example) was only done because we had no way of getting more individualized data. It is all very crude and probably will be an outdated concept in 20 years.
*It is illegal to discriminate based on sex for auto insurance purposes in many countries as well as Montana. Insurance companies in most US states take your credit score into consideration (if you don't pay your credit card bill you pay more for car insurance) but this practice is illegal in a handful of states. Massachusetts is one of them, if I recall correctly.