Posted On: January 4, 2005, 4:12 pm CST

Posted By: Whimpstomper

You folks calling for only three core variables to a credit score as being valid is like someone from the Department of Transportation stating that only at fault accidents, Reckless Driving and Careless Driving tickets are the only violations that should be used from motor vehicle records. That speeding, failure to yield, and the host of other entries are invalid. Statistics prove otherwise.

It's curious why it's so difficult to accept that variables blind to income, race, religion and so-forth do correlate to higher risk, thus justify higher cost.

It's also curious why scoring seems to have one set of rules, but existing underwriting statistics are ok to have another set of rules. For instance, why not a study that is likely to indicate unfair pricing on older homes, causing a disparate impact on lower income and minorities?

Why not a study showing states with greater percentage of minorities or lower income with higher insurance rates than other states with lower ratios of same, showing this to be wrong too?

Why is it ok to "over charge" young people for auto insurance where the ONLY variables used are age, sex, and inexperience? Hey, the majority of young males do NOT have claims, yet they pay a much greater rate since they have a higher risk of causing a claim, or have we forgotten the basic principles of insurance, you know, fairly economically spreading the risk. Oh yea, we're in the age of socialism, it's not politically correct to treat one person one iota different from another for any reason.

Say, I know a great island south of Florida you out to consider moving to...