Wednesday, 2 March 2011
The European Court of Justice’s strange ideas on male and female driver insurance.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ), in their infinite stupidity, recently decided that car insurance firms cannot charge women less than men, despite the fact that women are safer drivers than men.
The flaw in the Court of Justice’s decision stems from their non-grasp of economics, and for the following reasons.
GDP is maximised where prices reflect costs. If there are social reasons for thinking prices should NOT reflect costs (and that is sometimes a legitimate claim) it’s up to society as a whole or GOVERNMENT to alter the price via taxes or subsidies. That is, cross subsidisation between men and women or between any other two groups only makes sense if it can be shown that one group involves social costs AND the other group involves social benefits.
We don’t use taxes on alcoholic drinks to subsidise non-alcoholic drinks.
The ACTUAL reasons for the ECJ’s decision are plain as a pike staff: politics, fashion and the new religion – political correctness. “Discrimination” is a cardinal sin in the eyes of this new religion. And the morality of religious folk is often deplorable. For example Shia Muslims are scum of the earth in the eyes of many Sunnies. And non-Muslims are scum of the earth in the eyes of many Muslims.
Thus discrimination in any shape or form must be outlawed – unless of course the ECJ did some detailed research into matter, and proved that there are significant social “benefits” of having more young male drivers on the roads causing death and destruction.
Plus the idea that the ECJ did some detailed research, and proved that there are social benefits in having fewer women able to drive (and thus, in some cases find work) is laughable.