Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:25
Deep Purple's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 5,273
Groaned at 15 Times in 14 Posts
Thanked 5,284 Times in 2,568 Posts
Deep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Statistics can be made to show almost anything you want. For example, if 20% of accidents are caused by drunk drivers, 80% must be caused by sober drivers. Answer: ban sober drivers.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Deep Purple for this useful post:
  #22  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:26
Chemmie's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 4,150
Groaned at 33 Times in 29 Posts
Thanked 4,955 Times in 2,235 Posts
Chemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

I do understand the concept that a demographic which is a less safe at driving should pay more insurance. Just like a demographic with poor health history should pay more health insurance.

but being in the more expensive catagory in both, I will just keep my mouth shut.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:27
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
And you miss the point. It has for a very long time been unlawful to discriminate based on gender. Insurance companies now have to wake up and catch up. Regardless of how you twist or view statistics. Nobody argues against the fact that women are generally better drivers in terms of having fewer accidents.
Wrong :
Source - Wall Street Journal
Quote:
A 2004 European Union law that required nondiscrimination in
commerce carved out an exception for sex as a determining factor in
insurance premiums where the use is "based on relevant and accurate
actuarial and statistical data."
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank parnell for this useful post:
  #24  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:29
economisto
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
...and the rub... If I have had an accident already, am I more likely to have another accident or not ? Assuming the average number of accidents peopel cause , is , say for arguments sake, 3 , and I have had 3 accidents , I am statistically likely not to have another accident and my premiums should go down. But they won't will they...
But also that IMO, insurance companies just have to bite it and lose out, or women have to lose out. Sometimes, fairness and society and the rule of law come first.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:30
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
...and the rub... If I have had an accident already, am I more likely to have another accident or not ? Assuming the average number of accidents peopel cause , is , say for arguments sake, 3 , and I have had 3 accidents , I am statistically likely not to have another accident and my premiums should go down. But they won't will they...
You'd have to show that with statistics now wouldn't you ? All the statistical evidence would suggest actually that you are more likely to have another accident since there is tons of statistical evidence to suggest past claims behaviour for car insurance is very positively correlated to future claims behaviour.

EDIT : I can see that I'm not arguing with rational people here - but with fundamentalists. Shame.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank parnell for this useful post:
  #26  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:31
Upthehatters2008's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the kitchen at parties.
Posts: 4,540
Groaned at 204 Times in 120 Posts
Thanked 6,078 Times in 2,378 Posts
Upthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
Wrong :
Source - Wall Street Journal

I said based on Gender, I mentioned no other factors.
You quote gender + other factors. They cannot discrmininate on gender alone, as I said. Please read my posts carefully.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Upthehatters2008 for this useful post:
  #27  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:32
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
But also that IMO, insurance companies just have to bite it and lose out, or women have to lose out. Sometimes, fairness and society and the rule of law come first.
And what pray tell is the implication for the much larger pensions sector ?

Maybe think before you post from now on.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:32
Upthehatters2008's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the kitchen at parties.
Posts: 4,540
Groaned at 204 Times in 120 Posts
Thanked 6,078 Times in 2,378 Posts
Upthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
You'd have to show that with statistics now wouldn't you ? All the statistical evidence would suggest actually that you are more likely to have another accident since there is tons of statistical evidence to suggest past claims behaviour for car insurance is very positively correlated to future claims behaviour.

EDIT : I can see that I'm not arguing with rational people here - but with fundamentalists. Shame.

Actually, I consider myself fundamentally rational.

Can you stop with the insults and insinuations please, it isn't helping your cause.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:33
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
I said based on Gender, I mentioned no other factors.
You quote gender + other factors. They cannot discrmininate on gender alone, as I said. Please read my posts carefully.
Which other factor is mentioned in my post ? Please point it out. Please read carefully , repeatedly if neccessary.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:34
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
Actually, I consider myself fundamentally rational.

Can you stop with the insults and insinuations please, it isn't helping your cause.
I'm sure most fundamentalists consider themselves similarly.

No insults were meant ,just observations - if you could address the post content then that might help.

Listen just go eat a stats book , it'll be easier in the long run.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:34
economisto
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
And what pray tell is the implication for the much larger pensions sector ?

Maybe think before you post from now on.
It's equalising as we speak. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Pensions...ion/DG_4017919
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:36
Upthehatters2008's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the kitchen at parties.
Posts: 4,540
Groaned at 204 Times in 120 Posts
Thanked 6,078 Times in 2,378 Posts
Upthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
Which other factor is mentioned in my post ? Please point it out. Please read carefully , repeatedly if neccessary.

Duh...


an exception for sex as a determining factor in
insurance premiums where the use is "based on relevant and accurate actuarial and statistical data."


That is dsicrimination based on gender qualified with statistical data.
The other factor is accurate actuarial and statistical data.

Try the other side when you get up tomorrow morning please.
Reply With Quote
This user groans at Upthehatters2008 for this post:
  #33  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:37
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

So women are losing out in this case - i.e. your post above was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:38
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
Duh...


an exception for sex as a determining factor in
insurance premiums where the use is "based on relevant and accurate actuarial and statistical data."


That is dsicrimination based on gender qualified with statistical data.
The other factor is accurate actuarial and statistical data.
supporting sex discrimination !
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:41
economisto
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
So women are losing out in this case - i.e. your post above was wrong.
Huh? No, women are going from gaining an advantage based on unfair discrimination, to being treated equally. In exactly the same way as the insurance ruling.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:50
Carlos R's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Roundn'about Basel
Posts: 7,231
Groaned at 105 Times in 95 Posts
Thanked 9,934 Times in 4,178 Posts
Carlos R has a reputation beyond reputeCarlos R has a reputation beyond reputeCarlos R has a reputation beyond reputeCarlos R has a reputation beyond reputeCarlos R has a reputation beyond reputeCarlos R has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
...and the rub... If I have had an accident already, am I more likely to have another accident or not ? Assuming the average number of accidents peopel cause , is , say for arguments sake, 3 , and I have had 3 accidents , I am statistically likely not to have another accident and my premiums should go down. But they won't will they...
I've not really been following the discussion tbh, but you're not really going to stand by that statement are you?

In your example, the average number of accidents per person is 3, which means that some people will have more, some fewer, some 0. For the many that have 0, there needs to be a whole lot more who have >3 = high risk idiots people.

It isn't a quota system!

Edit: Oh! I think I missed that double negative...
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Carlos R for this useful post:
  #37  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:51
Upthehatters2008's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the kitchen at parties.
Posts: 4,540
Groaned at 204 Times in 120 Posts
Thanked 6,078 Times in 2,378 Posts
Upthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
supporting sex discrimination !
Not based on gender alone though. Gender + Driving accident history maybe. As I said, based on gender alone , it is unlawful discrimination.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:53
Upthehatters2008's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the kitchen at parties.
Posts: 4,540
Groaned at 204 Times in 120 Posts
Thanked 6,078 Times in 2,378 Posts
Upthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond reputeUpthehatters2008 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
I've not really been following the discussion tbh, but you're not really going to stand by that statement are you?

In your example, the average number of accidents per person is 3, which means that some people will have more, some fewer, some 0. For the many that have 0, there needs to be a whole lot more who have >3 = high risk idiots people.

It isn't a quota system!

No. It isn't a quota system. But if I have had a number of accidents equal to the statistical average, I am therefore less likely to have another accident based on statistics
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:56
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
Not based on gender alone though. Gender + Driving accident history maybe. As I said, based on gender alone , it is unlawful discrimination.
unless you can prove with a high degree of statistical accuracy (HINT : we can) that gender is related to claims experience.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01.03.2011, 15:58
parnell's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Geroldswil
Posts: 642
Groaned at 219 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 2,165 Times in 1,024 Posts
parnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond reputeparnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics and Discrimination

Quote:
View Post
No. It isn't a quota system. But if I have had a number of accidents equal to the statistical average, I am therefore less likely to have another accident based on statistics
Not at all - if accidents were truly independent then you (personally as a single risk) could have a billion accidents , have a statistical average of 3 (over all risks) and you (personally as a single risk) wouldn't be less likely to have another accident.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank parnell for this useful post:
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swiss Statistics Deep Purple Other/general 2 12.12.2011 13:43
Swiss weather statistics. krlock3 Other/general 9 25.05.2009 13:27
Realtime statistics mark Announcements 7 25.10.2006 20:09


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:52.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0