Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California's Revised Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance Draws Continued Objections

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the so-don't-buy-it dept.

The EFF has restated many of their original privacy objections about California's latest revision to the Pay-As-You-Drive auto insurance proposal. Admitting that the amended bill is an improvement, privacy advocates are still uneasy about the surveillance implications of this program. "The proposal centers on a simple idea: infrequent drivers are less of an insurance risk. By pricing policies according to the mileage driven, insurance companies can offer discounts to lower-risk infrequent drivers, and put an appropriate cost penalty on heavy drivers. The state estimates that 30% adoption of PAYD insurance nationwide would reduce miles driven by at least 10% among subscribers, and save 55 million tons of CO2 over the next ten years. The benefits of such a system could be quite dramatic, as California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner is sure to emphasize. Such insurance plans first became available in 2004, and are now available as a limited option in 30 US states from insurance companies like Progressive and Liberty Mutual."

9 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Bell curve??? by Foofoobar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is someone who drives less better at driving? It would seem someone who drives less frequently is less practiced and would be a greater risk as compared to someone who is a regular driver. There must be some sort of bell curve where the people on the ends pay more.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Bell curve??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know it is common practice on Slashdot to speculate beased on no more information than your initial gut reaction, but this sort of thing is actually the core business of insurance companies. They have people who are quite skilled statisticians, call actuaries, who fiddle over mountains of data to decide how much to charge who in order to maximize profit while still being able to offer comeptitive premiums.

      Because you know what a bell curve is doesn't put you in league with these people and your elementary passive aggressive questions do nothing to further anyone's understanding of anything. Not even your own.

    2. Re:Bell curve??? by Sparr0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if driver safety is inversely proportional to driving time, it is so at some ratio less than 1:1.

      That is, consider 3 people. Bob drives 1 mile a year, and has a 1% chance of getting in an accident for every mile he drives. Tom drives 100 miles a year and has a .1% chance of getting in an accident for every mile he drives. Jim drives 10000 miles a year and has a .01% chance of getting in an accident for every mile he drives.

      Bob is going to get in one accident every 100 years. Tom is going to get in 1 accident every 10 years. Jim is going to get in 1 accident every year.

      To be more realistic I would say decrease the %s by a factor of 1000, and increase the miles by a factor of 10.

      Why does Bob's insurance cost almost as much as Jim's, currently?

    3. Re:Bell curve??? by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most accidents happen within, I think it was five or ten miles of a person's home.

      Most driving happens within five or ten miles of a person's home.

    4. Re:Bell curve??? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bah, statistics. They can be used to prove ANYTHING.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  2. I drive exactly as much as I need to by daVinci1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would anyone think that paying by the mile would reduce the amount I'm driving?

    I don't go on long jaunts around the town just for the hell of it, I go because I need to get somewhere, or pick something up.

    So pretty much what this would do is either be a savings for me--because it'd be less than my buffet style policy--or it'd be more expensive for me. I'm guessing that the majority of people, myself included, would fall into the latter category.

    --
    I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
  3. how could it save... by MoFoQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    just don't know how it can save "55 million tons of CO2 a year"....people who drive a little will continue to drive a little with this insurance or not.

    I hate it when they fudge numbers and try to draw a causation out of it.
    A chicken didn't lay an egg because there was a law passed that gave tax incentives to the chickens to lay eggs....

    I hate it even more when politicians take credit for something that has nothing to do with anything.

  4. Re:Oh crap. by NiteMair · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dunno about others, but all of a sudden, I'd have an incentive to find the shortest router from point A to point B, even if that means city-streets instead of expressway. This means I'll be sitting in heavy traffic, clogging up the streets, taking longer to reach my destination, and probably causing more accidents and safety issues.

  5. Re:But that is nonsensical! by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The insurance company doesn't care how many miles you drive between accidents, it cares about how many accidents you have between years.

    --
    Free Martian Whores!