Makes sense

[dmallord]

It's against forum guidelines to post entire articles.

That's humorous. You just reposted it to criticize his post of it and Armpit gave you a like for your declaration not realizeing what you did.

 

[Saint_Ann]

That's humorous. You just reposted it to criticize his post of it and Armpit gave you a like for your declaration not realizeing what you did.

I've said all a long the rules aren't equally enforced. Feel free to like this post.

 

[dmallord]

I've said all a long the rules aren't equally enforced. Feel free to like this post.

It's not a post worth liking, in my opinion. What he posted made more sense than your 'it's against the rules to post a whole article' reply.

Moms always have favorites, no matter how much they claim to love each one equally. [So, I've noted.]

 

[HisArpy]

The individual states should provide flood insurance for their own constituents and charge accordingly. If insurance is unaffordable people won't build. imho

The problem is the mortgage holder requires it and if it's not current they will call the loan in full.

That would precipitate an immediate housing crisis like we've never seen and that would almost instantly avalanche into systemic bank failure that even the government couldn't bail us out of.

The answer is, and I hate to say it, regulation. Just not the type of regulation we're currently seeing in State run insurance commissions. What we need are regulations regarding how much profit and overhead public utilities can charge the customer in the form of rates. Insurance, since it's regulated by the States should be a public utility like power, gas, and water.

If infrastructure is included as an amortized item it wouldn't be within the allowed percentage of overhead and profit (which includes corporate compensation in all forms above a certain pay grade as well as capping stock dividends) we'd see better customer service and fewer multi billionaires with golden parachutes.

 

[icanhelp1]

The problem is the mortgage holder requires it and if it's not current they will call the loan in full.

That would precipitate an immediate housing crisis like we've never seen and that would almost instantly avalanche into systemic bank failure that even the government couldn't bail us out of.

The answer is, and I hate to say it, regulation. Just not the type of regulation we're currently seeing in State run insurance commissions. What we need are regulations regarding how much profit and overhead public utilities can charge the customer in the form of rates. Insurance, since it's regulated by the States should be a public utility like power, gas, and water.

If infrastructure is included as an amortized item it wouldn't be within the allowed percentage of overhead and profit (which includes corporate compensation in all forms above a certain pay grade as well as capping stock dividends) we'd see better customer service and fewer multi billionaires with golden parachutes.

Trust me I understand what you’re saying. My problem is what happens in Florida, SC, NC, CA insurance wise affects all the other states. My home owners insurance has double in the last five years. I haven’t filed a claim against my insurance company in over 15 years but that doesn’t stop insurance companies from premium increases at an alarming rate. It used to be insurance was based on your risk (locally) now the hurt is spread nationally. Just my opinion.

 

[Hel_Books]

It's not just rich people. It falls under FEMA which has been horribly mismanaged and being looked at by the Trump administration. Thanks for bringing this up. My sister's flood insurance was recently cancelled. Insurance company's are bailing out of that business cause they are also bleeding money. It reminds me of the Sam Kinnison monologue about starving people living in the desert. ' It's a desert. Move!'.

I expect Trump will kill the FEMA disaster relief work while keeping the NFIP insurance subsidies. Classic Trumpian waste/fraud/abuse.

 

[Hel_Books]

Hel_Books said:
I only posted it because you claimed it wasn't what it was. Now are you willing to admit that the article demonstrates that your federal government subsidizes flood insurance?

The individual states should provide flood insurance for their own constituents and charge accordingly. If insurance is unaffordable people won't build. imho

Then you have the same problem of government subsidies going to bad behaviour (building in flood zones) just at the state rather than the federal level. Florida is doing that, and it's killing them.

 

[HisArpy]

Trust me I understand what you’re saying. My problem is what happens in Florida, SC, NC, CA insurance wise affects all the other states. My home owners insurance has double in the last five years. I haven’t filed a claim against my insurance company in over 15 years but that doesn’t stop insurance companies from premium increases at an alarming rate. It used to be insurance was based on your risk (locally) now the hurt is spread nationally. Just my opinion.

The root of the problem for insurance is exactly the same as for public utilities.

Insurance knows that they're going to have to pay claims from disasters. This gives them a choice; they can either have sufficient reserves, at the expense of bonuses and golden parachutes, and, in the case of public utilities, repairs/upgrades to infrastructure, or they raise rates.

They chose to keep their payouts and parachutes and do nothing. Now they've insufficient reserves to pay claims so they turn to the Fed Gov to bail them out and also raise rates to the consumer. This is essentially consumer fraud but no one seems to care.

 

[Saint_Ann]

I expect Trump will kill the FEMA disaster relief work while keeping the NFIP insurance subsidies. Classic Trumpian waste/fraud/abuse.

At least with NFIP there is some monies coming in. In a disaster, FEMA is strictly money going out. No one will stand for the government not helping all those (rich) people.

 

[Hel_Books]

Hel_Books said:
I expect Trump will kill the FEMA disaster relief work while keeping the NFIP insurance subsidies. Classic Trumpian waste/fraud/abuse.

At least with NFIP there is some monies coming in. In a disaster, FEMA is strictly money going out. No one will stand for the government not helping all those (rich) people.

That's the problem with the NFIP. It was instituted because the federal government was paying out all that money to rebuild. The ones running the rebuilding programs said, "This is silly, we're putting up houses in the same locations, in dangerous flood zones. We should leave those areas alone and help people build houses in safe zones!" Sensible, right?

Unfortunately, voters didn't like being told that they were living in dangerous swamps or on the beach too near the ocean and should build their houses elsewhere. So the NFIP was established, to at least get a little money to rebuild the fools' beach houses.

Even more unfortunately, that encouraged even MORE building in dangerous, flood-prone areas. Eventually, when the people enjoying beach-front property run out of other people's money to rebuild after successive hurricanes, the whole scheme will collapse like a house of cards. Or like a house in New Orleans or Miami Beach.

And you, the American taxpayer will be left holding the soggy bag.