Post: #26

(07-30-2018 05:56 PM)david.garrett84 Wrote:  I wonder if insurance companies charge more for trannies' life insurance (much higher risk of suicide).

Also lovely that despite there "not being two genders", trannies are not railing against insurance companies keeping the traditional dichotomy of two genders (albeit with people able to switch between them).

They wouldn't charge any more money. Most insurance companies have a suicide clause that if you commit suicide, your family will not get the payoff.

Higher payments are usually reserved for those who are overweight or have a medical problem. Most of those people are required to get a physical and blood test to see if they would even qualify for the insurance they desire.

Some will have to pay higher premiums because their blood pressure is high or their height to weight ratio pins them in the obese category. Others who have a medical condition (i.e. cystic fibrosis) won't qualify for insurance as they would be too high risk.


Edit: Worked insurance for a while. Seen a whole bunch of stuff regarding families trying to collect insurance payouts or cases with those trying to qualify.

Post: #27

One of my buddies with insight into the Insurance business explained to be that Men pay more simply due to driving significantly more than Women.

Men have more accidents, but the proportion of Women drivers having accident is greater than Men. As explained by the Great Researcher Warren Farrell, car insurance policy in reality are unconstitutional.

Since Men pay significantly more for car insurance, then Women should significantly pay more for Healthcare, which is not the case under Obamacare in the US.

Post: #28

(07-30-2018 12:30 PM)Saweeep Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 12:22 PM)la bodhisattva Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 08:57 AM)Thot Leader Wrote:  Once again trannies think the world revolves around them. The guy is pointing out that a) car insurance in Canada is basically extortion (he's in Alberta; Ontarians on average pay twice as much as Albertans) and b) nobody stands for women getting fucked by legally sanctioned gender discrimination, but it happens to men all the time. Funny how when statistics prove women are better than men (or minorities are better than whites, for that matter) no one minds acknowledging it or codifying it legally and culturally, but when it's the other way around you'd be better off suggesting the earth is flat.

Studies show that women are WORSE drivers and get into more accidents than men. How insurance companies are legally allowed to charge more for men is baffling. What's more, is that NO ONE on the left cites gender discrimination even if statistics backed up the insurance companies. They don't stand for blacks or latinos being denied loans because they are statistically more dependent on government assistance. And they certainly wouldn't condone any homebuyer (white, black, Asian, whatever) for researching the demographics of a neighborhood before buying or renting a home or opening a business based on the legitimate statistics that certain populations commit a disproportionate amount of crime, regardless of relative poverty.

women are worse drivers, U of Mich study shows

This isn't a difficult thing to figure out...when men crash, they cost insurance companies more money. Lots more.

You rarely hear about a woman barrel rolling her car off a road into a house at 3am with 4 mates on board. Women drive into each other in supermarkets all the time instead.

Being "good at driving" i.e. the mechanics of driving, is not the same thing as being a driver in less risk of being in a collision. Men can both drive better and cause more catastrophic collisions, like Saweeep said.

Post: #29

(07-30-2018 06:22 PM)eljeffster Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 12:30 PM)Saweeep Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 12:22 PM)la bodhisattva Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 08:57 AM)Thot Leader Wrote:  Once again trannies think the world revolves around them. The guy is pointing out that a) car insurance in Canada is basically extortion (he's in Alberta; Ontarians on average pay twice as much as Albertans) and b) nobody stands for women getting fucked by legally sanctioned gender discrimination, but it happens to men all the time. Funny how when statistics prove women are better than men (or minorities are better than whites, for that matter) no one minds acknowledging it or codifying it legally and culturally, but when it's the other way around you'd be better off suggesting the earth is flat.

Studies show that women are WORSE drivers and get into more accidents than men. How insurance companies are legally allowed to charge more for men is baffling. What's more, is that NO ONE on the left cites gender discrimination even if statistics backed up the insurance companies. They don't stand for blacks or latinos being denied loans because they are statistically more dependent on government assistance. And they certainly wouldn't condone any homebuyer (white, black, Asian, whatever) for researching the demographics of a neighborhood before buying or renting a home or opening a business based on the legitimate statistics that certain populations commit a disproportionate amount of crime, regardless of relative poverty.

women are worse drivers, U of Mich study shows

This isn't a difficult thing to figure out...when men crash, they cost insurance companies more money. Lots more.

You rarely hear about a woman barrel rolling her car off a road into a house at 3am with 4 mates on board. Women drive into each other in supermarkets all the time instead.

Being "good at driving" i.e. the mechanics of driving, is not the same thing as being a driver in less risk of being in a collision. Men can both drive better and cause more catastrophic collisions, like Saweeep said.

This guy gets it.

How many Daytona 500s has Danica Patrick won?

How many did Dale Earnhardt win?

Now tell me who's better drivers.

Aloha!

Post: #30

When was the last time a transexual got nailed for fraud? Exhibit A, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel David Schroer. He got out of the army, interviewed at the Library of Congress for a position as a terrorism research analyst and after being extended and accepting an offer, he then dropped the bomb that he was going to report to work as a woman.

They rescinded the offer, he sued and got the job reinstated with back pay and damages.

Quote:WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A former Army commander who underwent a sex change operation was discriminated against by the U.S. government, a federal judge ruled Friday in an important victory for transgenders claiming bias in the workplace.

Diane Schroer won her federal lawsuit against the Library of Congress after officials backed out of a 2005 job offer when told of her intention to become a transsexual. At the time of the job interview for a position as a senior terrorism research analyst, David Schroer was a male. He had been a onetime Army Special Forces commander.

U.S. District Court Judge James Robinson said Schroer's civil rights were violated.

"The evidence established that the Library was enthusiastic about hiring David Schroer -- until she disclosed her transsexuality," Robinson wrote. "The Library revoked the offer when it learned that a man named David intended to become, legally, culturally and physically, a woman named Diane. This was discrimination 'because of ... sex.' "

The judge will later rule on what financial damages Schroer is due.

"It is especially gratifying that the court has ruled that discriminating against someone for transitioning is illegal," said Schroer in a statement from the ACLU, which represented her in court.

"I knew all along that the 25 years of experience I gained defending our country didn't disappear when I transitioned, so it was hard to understand why I was being turned down for a job doing what I do best just because I'm transgender. It is tremendously gratifying to have your faith in this country, and what is fundamentally right and fair, be reaffirmed."

After Schroer had retired from the military, she applied for a job at the Library of Congress. Court records show that Schroer, then a male, took her future boss to lunch to outline her transition to a female, as she planned to present herself as a female on her first day of the job.

Schroer testified that on the day after the lunch, the job offer was rescinded, and she was told she wasn't a "good fit" for the library.

The ACLU said the ruling sends a "loud and clear" message to employers against firing or refusing to hire someone for changing their gender.

There was no immediate reaction from the library, which had claimed at trial that transgender people are not covered under federal anti-discrimination laws.

In other words, unlike our Canadian pal the insurance miser and fake tranny, this asshole lied about his true intentions and was rewarded for it, with not only the job he got by deception but likely with financial damages also. The ACLU is right about the message being sent, one that says dishonesty will be rewarded.

I guess when they lie, it's ok, but when the tables are turned that's different.

Post: #31

Thibk the uproar should be ageism n sexism on youth n males to pay more.

Post: #32

(07-31-2018 04:02 AM)Newguy101 Wrote:  Thibk the uproar should be ageism n sexism on youth n males to pay more.

What does the word "n" mean? I couldn't find it in the dictionary.

Post: #33

I think he means 'n'

Post: #34

(07-30-2018 09:23 AM)JekyllAndHyde Wrote:  

WHGSW

Would Have Gay Sex With.

Post: #35

Beat the system. Game Recognized.

Post: #36

Men as a sex are better drivers than women.

Low IQ, low inhibition, young men are absolutely retarded dangers to other motorists.

I bet you could find a very strong IQ to accident correlation.

Edit: Hey,someone did that already

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...759090013B

Quote:Risk of mortality was higher for men with lower scores on the army intelligence test