Well not really. Your annual mileage and distance from work helps them to asses your risk of a claim. Your info is put into a pool of other drivers with similar numbers and based on that data and history they can determine your risk and thus rates to charge.

 

iyllcost more than 300 bucks a month to insure me to drive 6 miles to and from work.

 

My odometer already reads at 1/2 what I'm actually driving. Just another retarded attempt at changing **** that doesn't need to be changed.

 

My "toys" are already at a discount for low mileage per year.

 

Yep.

 

right now the best thing to do is vote the correct people in to office, at the lowest level and hope it "trickles" up. we're already doing well with ron paul becoming better known and HR1207 gaining speed. the fed threatened to raise interest rates if HR1207 wasnt stopped so theyre scared.

overall though how could you do something in today's day and age? gov locks you up and throws away the key, calls you a terrorist, a traitor. media wont report you as a patriot either. its funny how we didnt use to have all these BS taxes and we used to be better off than we are now.

what would I be prepared to do though? enlisting in the military wont help out. stop buying foreign made products, particularly china. write to local congressmen about laws that are unjust and unfair. start small. our gov is too big and needs to be restructured. too many people in it for personal gain. its sad. what else can you do besides go on a killing spree or snap like whackos such as timothy mcveigh. it seems you cant get a point across unless you turn to violence, which is really sad and says a lot about our people. Im not gonna turn to violence...

oh well this thread is gonna get locked, too much politics involved.

 

As long as the political discussion stops here, I'll let it live.

If anyone wants to talk about the pros and cons of the bill itself, that's fine.

 

Driving a couple miles to work in a city may be (risk wise) exactly equivalent to driving 30 miles to work in the middle of nowhere... so this proposal only makes sense if it's more than just the miles driven but also the area the driving is being done IN.

None of the players in this proposed change is in it to lose money... so in all likelihood we (the folks paying) WILL be losing money.

 

This is sort of a meaningless statistic because the large majority of time spent driving, for the average person, is within 7 miles of their house... so of course where you spend the most time driving is going to be where the most accidents occur. If your point is to say that city driving is more accident-prone, then I still agree... but another factor to consider is that most accidents that occur on city and suburban streets do not result in serious injury or death. Many accidents on the highway do. What costs insurance companies the most isn't repairing your car... it's repairing people's bodies and paying off wrongful injury/death lawsuits. So while accidents per mile driven are surely lower on the highway, they're also surely more expensive when they do happen.

In the end the cost of risk per mile driven may be closer than you'd expect, but I don't have access to those stats. Insurance companies do, though.

 

This type of thing (pay-as-you-drive) is already offered by some insurance companies:
http://www.progressive.com/myrate/

This program, Progressive's MyRate, considers your driving behavior and not just mileage tracking.

 

They'd have to pay me for insuring my '67 Camaros.