Men's Group

Major Nikon

(36,922 posts)

15. Just because something is discriminatory, doesn't mean it's wrong

Reply to 4th law of robotics (Original post)

Thu Oct 11, 2012, 06:08 AM

Oct 2012

This is a hard concept for most people to grasp. The word discrimination carries a lot of negative connotation so people simply assume that all discrimination is always wrong, even though the logical argument for that fails. Trucking companies aren't forced to hire blind truckers for obvious reasons. Lots of other examples exist.

So simply labeling a practice as discriminatory by itself is not a sufficient argument for corrective measures. You still have to make the case that such discrimination is ethically wrong, and I'm not sure such an argument can be reasonably made. Older people are charged higher rates also, which is also discriminatory. So long as insurance companies are allowed to use actuaries to determine rates, there will always be effective discrimination.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Double standard in reporting gender based insurance costs [View all] 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 OP

Exactly right. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #1

I spent around 20 or so years as a insurance underwriter... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #2

"Messing with the system for political purposes doesn't change the arithmetic . . . " 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #6

Lots of actuarial data exists. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #10

Oops! Just reread my post and what I meant was... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #11

Try as I might- digonswine Oct 2012 #3

In both cases people are charged more due to their gender 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #4

I'm glad you were not comparing the two as equal- digonswine Oct 2012 #5

As I explained upthread, they are equivalent... TreasonousBastard Oct 2012 #7

I understand that from the insurer's viewpoint- digonswine Oct 2012 #8

I agree with all that 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #13

I'm not even sure how you would make the argument from a social justice viewpoint Major Nikon Oct 2012 #17

I plug any argument or discussion around Health Insurance into my operating system, and I always get Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #9

"US gets single payer health care system! Women expected to be benefit most" 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #12

Everyone would win. Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #14

I would go two steps farther Major Nikon Oct 2012 #16

Hmm, I would think that a SPHC funded through taxes would do that sort of automatically Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #19

Just because something is discriminatory, doesn't mean it's wrong Major Nikon Oct 2012 #15

Yup. The opposite of "discriminate" is "indiscriminate" lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #18

I think it is counterproductive to universal and/or single payer Major Nikon Oct 2012 #20