New Reality

ScottyJack wrote

 

 Mother Nature does not care about your money!

Nor does she care about dots on a map

Natural disasters can happen anywhere

I don't really care if rich people build in the areas as long as the normal person are not subsidizing their risk when they have a loss.  The Federal Flood Insurance program is a farce, they need to turn it over to private insurance companies who will charge the actual cost for the coverage.  You will find most people will not be able to afford the insurance and that will reduce the amount of people in those areas.  Pretty 101 stuff if we have the political will to tell people your just not well off enough to own in that neighborhood.

Well then, I guess everyone should leave the west and move to upstate New York.

Dont you dare!!

The federal program is in place because private insurance will not provide insurance because it makes no economical sense.   Capitalism at its finest.

campgottagopee wrote

ScottyJack wrote

 Mother Nature does not care about your money!

Nor does she care about dots on a map
Natural disasters can happen anywhere

Agree with Camp.

ScottyJack wrote

The most telling state of denial in that article is all the new construction in the fire harard zones.  Just like the mega rich properties in flood zones we the people should not be resonsible for their greed.  You build there you pay the costs. No insursance!  And quite frankly no fire response!!

I guess it was this comment that just seemed a bit heartless to me. I also think that there has been some irresponsible building and irresponsible bailouts, but I'm not ready to condemn all of these people to death:



I guess I'd be okay with tjf's solution (charge actual insurance rates), or RA's solution (encourage ppl to move). I'm sure people from Miami and LA would love to move to Utica and Gary, Indiana. And the people there would be happy to have them!

Yeah, like routinely in your drawers!

Heartless?  

Heartless was mass genocide for gold and silver

Heatless is causing extinction of species so materialist can throw larvish dinner parties in their gawdy mansions

Heartless?  Heartless is our president!!!

   

Good one lil fella

you come up with that one all by yourself?

you suck at fooze

Private insurance companies will not get involved because the premiums generated are no where they need to be to cover the losses.  Every time they talk about turning it over and run the numbers the actual cost to insure places in flood zones are significantly higher than the premiums being offered by the subsidized federal program. elected officials lose the will to turn it over because of the unrest it will cause.    

All my material is original. And Im still laughing at that last one.  

Pretty sure the well off people would have a problem paying the actual costs as well.  

Im sick and tired of tax dollars paying for rebuilding in hazard zones!  

And if that is the case then nothing gets built there.  Only makes sense.  

To me its common sense.  We should not build in hazard areas.  

CampNaturalDisaster

Hahahahahahahahahahah!

Add ---- WaitingToHappen

ScottyJack wrote

To me its common sense.  We should not build in hazard areas.

 I totally agree.  These storms are causing more damage not because they are that much different from the past particularly the storms of the 60's but instead because areas that had no business being built up had been due to bad local zoning and planning.  

ScottyJack wrote

To me its common sense.  We should not build in hazard areas.

Z wrote

 I totally agree.  These storms are causing more damage not because they are that much different from the past particularly the storms of the 60's but instead because areas that had no business being built up had been due to bad local zoning and planning.

Me too, although I don't know that the storms are that much different, probably worse.  As far as MC goes, I agree with that to some degree.....it sounds reasonable to have a grandfather clause in there.  For people/families who have lived in prone areas for 50+ years (arbitrary number, prior to reasonable forecasting and communications), grandfathering sounds reasonable.

MC2 5678F589 wrote

I guess it was this comment that just seemed a bit heartless to me. I also think that there has been some irresponsible building and irresponsible bailouts, but I'm not ready to condemn all of these people to death:

What a great map. Great amount of information at a glance.

I read a great article yesterday, can't find it now, but it talked about common sense regarding rebuilding after natural disasters. They gave examples of a handful of houses that were appraised at 70K yet had been rebuilt several times to the tune of 600,000 in claims. That makes no sense at all. There should be some kind of formula that once the limit is met you need to take the insurance money and get out. If not you''re on your own after a final rebuild.