Insurance racket discriminates against renters (a blast from the past)

This is a story we've had backlogged since 2016, but do you think things have gotten any better since then? Spoiler: they haven't.

A report by the Consumer Federation of America revealed that people who rent their home pay up to 47% more for car insurance than homeowners. The study covered 10 American cities.

This analysis used a persona to obtain insurance quotes from several major car insurers. It discovered that renters paid an average of 6% more for basic liability coverage than homeowners. And that includes data from Oakland, which was governed by a California law that was supposed to ban insurers from using homeownership as a factor in determining the cost of auto insurance. In the 9 cities besides Oakland, Liberty Mutual charged an average of 19% more to renters. Allstate increased rates 19% for renters in Tampa. And in Louisville, Farmers increased rates by a staggering 47%.

This is of course a form of classism. I don't even need to tell you that part. And there's no evidence that any state has done a damn thing to rein it in since then. You can bet your bizcream that – if anything – states have actually dug in on enforcing insurance mandates, especially against the working class. I damn sure haven't seen any sign that they've done anything to stop renters from being charged higher rates.

In fact, I think it's classism for the sake of classism. Insurers discriminate just because they feel like it – not because they actually believe that any data justifies it.