I really find this interesting:
Progressive Insurance announced the availability of insurance protection for pets in automobiles. The announcement was colored as a promotional move to entice new customers. I just about busted a gut when I heard about it. The fact of the matter is that insurance actuary tables reveal that by percentage, autos with pets riding in them have fewer and less destructive collisions than automobiles without pets in them. George Soros doesn’t give a rat’s patootie about your pet. It’s all about his own bottom line. In fact, if those same actuary tables showed beyond a doubt that natural blondes had fewer auto collisions than the rest of us, hair color would be a determining factor in calculating your insurance premium and natural blonds would get preferred rates. It’s that simple.
What a cynical view of the insurance industry! Yet, so accurate.
You really have to wonder why there would be a correlation between driving with a pet and safety. What is the correlation between driving with children and driver safety and how does it compare to driving with pets? I would be really curious.