Then there are the larger number of folks who are determined just to save money. They will use the research about the alleged correlation of credit score (or no score) and insurance premiums to try to reduce the monthly nut. A recent Gallup poll said that about 62% of those surveyed were focused on saving, not spending. Before the financial meltdown, the percentage was about 50.
In The Wall Street Journal, Andrea Coombes reports that WalletHub found:
" ... wide variations in rates quoted online for two hypothetical people, identical except that one had excellent credit and the other had no credit."
Those with no credit history who developed the pattern of paying in cash wound up paying more for their monthly car insurance. Here is the WSJ coverage (sub. req.)
The pragmatic response is: Apply for credit. That could be as simple as responding to one of the flyers coming in snail mail from issuers of credit cards or to key in "credit card applications" online.
Currently, one's credit card rating or FICO score is as critical to navigating the world as a female's weight in the 1950s and before the Second Women's Liberation Movement. Sure we could have fought the social pressure to be thin. But that would have probably have made it worse, wouldn't it.
The less pragmatic might bring this issue of alleged price discrimination based on FICO score to the attention of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Richard Cordrey seems to be government-approved version of Ralph Nader in the the late 1960s. The latter help change the law as it related to consumers. Cordrey could blow up the power of the FICO number on consumer life, be that shopping for auto insurance or trying to be approved for a residential rental.
Meanwhile, the monthly nut for my Chevy is half what it had been when my credit score was 740. Now it's nicely over 800. Other factors weigh in, such as change of location. But ...