Slashdot Mirror

This seemed pretty wacky, so I looked at the actual "study". It's a fluff piece with no grounding in reality.

The first major assumption is that a family pays $500/month to lease a car every month. Most sensible families have a $30k car paid off in 5 years and drive it another 5.

A second major assumption is that the cost of ride sharing currently covers the full purchase price, maintenance, and depreciation of the driver's vehicle. I do not know that this is the case.

So if you ignore the cost of owning the ride share car, and you inflate the cost of owning a car, it's cheaper to ride share!

Fucking genius!

In actual fact, the most frequently stolen vehicle is the Honda Accord. The Camry is #5.

3600,000 honda accords are sold each year. Even if you went out and stole every Model S in the world (all 125,000 sold so far) you still wouldn't budge it from the most stolen list

The flashier a car looks ... the more likely someone will steal it

...

I know I'm not the only one who would prefer a "supercar" performance in a "Toyota Camry chassis" sedan.

In actual fact, the most frequently stolen vehicle is the Honda Accord. The Camry is #5.

Speeding endangers lives; airbnb renting does not. Therefore, speeding is much worse. Let them do what they want with their property.

Well that certainly depends. What if the property they are renting on AirBnB is unsafe? Doesn't have all of the safety accommodations that one might expect in a rented lodging? Hell, you could die in a fire because the place doesn't have smoke detectors or a fire extinguisher. AirBnB is just like Uber: they flout the rules that drive up the cost of the service industry they are competing and act as though they are somehow different than those services themselves. They are not. And certainly the people who are renting their property out on AirBnB are cheating their own community. Maybe they make a few dollars but they also deprive their community of the hotel taxes that AirBnB does not collect. Therefore they are a blight on their community.

Oh And PS, studies have found that people driving slow in the left hand lane are more dangerous than those who speed. Even insurance companies are trying to get their customers to drive faster or get out of the way.

Speculation is moot. Show me trials before it becomes federal law or some ilk like that.

I've discovered this really useful web site called "The Google", it lets you type in a search term like "studies of the effectiveness of automatic braking systems", and it will show you what you're looking for. It's really cool!

I'll be cool with the ACA mandating equal pricing for the genders when my auto insurance company is held to the same standard.

Shakrai, male, 32, 790 FICO score, zero moving violations, zero accidents, six month premium for 2012 Honda Civic: $450
Shakrai's ex-gf, female, 31, 710 FICO score, three moving violations, two at fault accidents, six month premium for 2011 Honda Civic: $390

Same liability limits, I had higher physical damage deductibles, and a 10% discount for defensive driver training that she lacked, both through Progressive.

I wonder when the big man at 1600 Pennsylvania is going to fix this gender disparity?

And your insurance company thinks driving slow is dangerous.

You don't pay for an airline ticket from your bank's website. That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

Click Here for the reference if you haven't seen it.

It's not just intuition - any cop will tell you that going below the speed of traffic is also unsafe for this reason. I was instructed this in driving school too. Granted, my personal anecdote isn't the statistic you're looking for, but it's not just some random Slashdotter's baseless assertion.

I'm assuming that Esurance has a big profit motive to encourage safer driving.