Insurance having big lobbying or not doesn't change the FACT that the probability of an insured person having an accident are numerical based.
Insurance companies may be lobbying for a cap of payout, mandating certain safety features, allowing them to drop certain high risk clients, sue someone if they receive payout elsewhere, etc.
But it doesn't change how much more risky (or less risky) you are over another driver.
And statistically speaking, two independent factors are independent (will not affect one another). The example about rolling dice and flip a coin is like that because they don't want you to confuse rolling one dice vs rolling another, or rolling the same dice twice vs rolling 2 different dice. Having dice roll and coin flip eliminate this confusion, and for better visual effect as well.
Some would believe otherwise (and those people buy lottery tickets), that you can get higher chances by picking a more frequently occurring past number. Others believe that getting married or not has something to do with how many times you got into car accidents in the past, and therefore those who never got married with no accident will have a worse rate quote than someone married but have more accidents.
I'd like to see a prove of the opposite, so I'll get an online quote and see how much of a difference we'll see between married with 3 accident vs single with no accident, all else equal. I'll also run another experiment and see if I mention insurance lobbying will get me penalized when obtaining a quote as well, just for laugh and giggle for SteveSRT8.
