@mg0314a and all you other male drivers who think you are so burdened.

Are you 25 or younger. Or is the age 25 anymore? Maybe it is younger now? It has been a while since I worked giving quotes for car insurance. Oh, and ALL teen drivers have higher rates. Just having a teen driver in the family raises the family rates. Teen, not just male teen. So I guess families with teens are unfairly burdened too? I am sure there are quite a few women in those families paying higher rates for the family than a woman with out a teen.

Stop and think gentlemen - if you are paying higher premiums than girls your same age - yes that is unfair since you never have an accident, right?

But - you can expect your insurance to go down in price once you get over 20 or 25 or whatever the trigger age is now. (It will go up once you get elderly - no male female difference)

So how old are you and how many years before you get the SAME rate as a woman your age?

You whiners are subsidizing all those reckless young male drivers. And older more experienced drivers are subsidizing the young and reckless. And EVERYONE with a good driving record is subsidizing the bad drivers.

It is the way insurance works.

And no, it isn't always fair or sensible - I pay higher rates because I live in a county with a high number of uninsured drivers - ironic eh?

I am all for cleaning up the tyrany of car insurance industry - but lets do something for health insurance first - it effects more people and at least with car insurance - your premiums will drop when you get over the trigger age and then there is no diff between male/female.

This is not true: Like how males until they are married are charged more for car insurance

It is age.

Do you think that a man getting married at 40 will have a reduction in his insurance? Not true.

However, a man getting married at 20 might. Because single men who are 20 are considered riskier. Complain that marital status is discriminatory and young married guys are getting an advantage, why doncha.

I am all for more equality in car insurance but as someone stated earlier - the group who feels penalized needs to do the work. Yeah we women are good at organising but geez fellows - get off your doofs if you feel discriminated against.

I think it is justifyably higher for TEENS (both genders) who have been driving for less than a couple of years. I actually like laws that forbid a bunch of teens in a car - recipe for accident. But I would like to see it go down for both genders if there is no problem after 2 years, and then down more as clean driving exists. I absolutely HATE raising insurance rates when someone ELSE hits you. It should be based on the insured driving record.

You're a particular type of self indulgent idiot to come on Broadsheet and complain you pay more car insurance 'cause you are a young male, when this particular subject is health insurance and how it effects women.

Back to health insurance:

Every one will need health care at some point - I don't care how healthy a life you lead. Cancer happens just like a car going through a stop sign happens to the best of drivers.

Premium cost go down if everyone is in the pool. Also - it has to be non-profit. Sorry, but for profit insurance is in it for the profit.

I was on the Canadian system for a while - each province was a little different but the premiums were low - I paid 12 a month (my employer paid 12) - I think it was double for a family - no matter how big. I don't know what it is now but I am sure it is still reasonable. It was single pool and non-profit and my doctor still drove a Mercedes, so doctors were still at the top of the economic system.

While there were complainers, I never heard people complain about subsidizing people who were less healthy like I do here. Also - even though I could go to the doctors any time I wanted for "free" - I rarely did. Here in the US, I had great employer paid insurance until I was laid off last year - I rarely went then too - so please, stop the whole "people will clog the system if they have socialized medicine" meme.

It just is not true. The majority of people just don't like going and frankly - are too busy with life.

Swine Flu - then you believe that women should bear the brunt financially for childbearing?

Just a question. (the rest is not targeted to you)

I don't disagree with the statement that women seek medical treatment more than men. Childbearing is one thing that women do that men do not. I can also attest to the fact that many men leave health issues as long as they can, and only seek treatment when the issue cannot be ignored.

Of course - then treatment is more expensive.

It is better for EVERYONE if we have medical coverage we can afford in this country. So pool it, make it non-profit and stop worrying about who is "getting more". You might need to get more than your fair share someday.

This is from someone, a female, who rarely - and I do mean rarely - has needed medical care. I've paid insurance for years and yes - I pay for all those families who are making babies but I never whined about it. I pay for men who neglect their upkeep and now have diabedes and heart issues. It is how pooled insurance works.

Suck it up or pay as you go and forgo group supported assistance.