The individuals that had property damage resulting from hurricane Sandy - living in a flood prone area, shouldn't they have had insurance to cover their losses - if they made the choice not to have insurance, or skimped and didn't get enough insurance, why is it a taxpayer problem now?
I agree. We have to depend on our insurance. Wendy messed me up badly but my insurance helped me back on my feet. Never saw a dime of tax payer money.
When I lived in NW Florida and the beachfront homes got destroyed over and over by hurricanes, I figured that the homeowners made a bad decision rebuilding but as long as it was their money, it was none of my business. I even figured that it was bad business for an insurance company to take on that kinda risk, but as long as it was a private business, again, none of my business. But when an individual looks for tax dollars to cover personal losses, then I have to say "Sorry . . .".
I'm not talking about infrastructure stuff here - but again, if a municipality needs to rebuild a road or a bridge, isn't that a bond issue or a local tax issue - not a Federal government issue?
The vote today is on a bill to replenish the federal flood insurance program with $9.7 billion. They don't have enough money to pay all flood insurance claims
I guess the federal government had to get into the flood insurance business because it was financially not workable for a regular insurance company to handle that kind of risk - and I'd guess that the rates that the federal government is charging for flood insurance are no where close to what that should be, if based on sound acturial principles.
And I keep wondering why (as a taxpayer) I'm forced to subsidize soemoen else's bad decisions - like living in a flood or hurricane zone and not getting enough insurance.
Because most people today, including the president, feel they are not responsible for anything that goes wrong in their life. Even after four years the president is still blaming his predecessor for the poor economy and everything else that puts a blemish on his term.
My understanding of how flood insurance (here in the US at least) works is the same as yours - it's so risky that no private insurance company would touch it so the government has so step in. But the last time I've spoken to an insurance agent (of a private insurance company, perhaps it's important to note), their explanation sounded more graceful than \"subsidizing someone else's bad decisions\". She was basically saying that noone is ever completely safe from flood, regardless of where the house is located (i.e. middle of corn fields or beach front) and so it's everyone's problem, hence it's the government's problem.
I live not too far from a creek that does swell from time to time, although it never actually reaches anywhere close to my house, but the last time it did, the explanation that \"noone is ever safe\" sounded somewhat reasonable to me.
How did you manage to bring Obama into a discussion about flood insurance set up when he was 7 years old:
Also, don't you need to actually buy that insurance to be covered by it? Buy as in "feel responsible enough" to pay for it?
There isn't anything unique in this about Sandy. You apparently are familiar with the fact that following these major natural disasters, the federal govt usually apporpiates money to help offset the losses. It's been done with FL hurricanes, Katrina, earthquakes, etc.
The argument that you should just insure it yourself comes up every time, but so far it hasn't prevailed.
You also need to remember that global warming is changing the climate.
This was the first time New York City ever got flooded by a hurricane swell. No one anticipated that to happen because it's never happened before. (Unlike New Orleans where the City knew that they'd be flooded if they got hit by a Catagory 5 hurricane and were just hoping they wouldn't).
You have surpassed your past demonstrations of ignorance
" Attila Iskander" wrote in news:kc7eag$8et$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:
Sandy wasn't really that bad a storm, it could have been worse. However it was a storm with a very large area of (near) hurricane-force winds. Plus just before landfall it changed direction in an unfavorbale way. Lastly it hit just at the time of high tide at a time when there is always an abnormally (pun intended) high tide - at full (or new) moon, when the moon's and sun's gravitational forces combine to increase the tides. Therefore there was an enormous storm surge that destroyed barrier beach towns and cities because in their "wisdom" their buildings were not protected by dunes or seawalls. All the ensuing misery was predicted. When (not if) a stronger hurricane will hit in the same way and at a similar lunar time, the devastation will be greater, perhaps much greater.
This liberal isn't feeling very sorry for the financial hurt of second home owners, or those who willfully chose to have their primary home in these areas. But, and this is a big but, some areas of New York and environs chose to build housing for the less well off right on those beaches etc, so they could raze the slums nearer to the center (Manhattan) and build for the more well-off. This happened apparently in the times of Robert Moses (curse). Therefore, I fully support the use of Federal funds to help those people with their emergency housing and with eventual replacement housing. In addition, infrastructure imp[rovements should be at least subsidized, just like New Orleans after Katrina (jus 1 example). I have no idea why there should be funds for Alaskan fisheries or museums in these bills. But Congress in their "wisdom" almost always wins extrra votes for by inserting unrelated pork.
Lastly, as happened after hurricanes in Florida and elsewhere, in Holland after the 1953 floods, and Bangladesh floods, zoning and building codes hereabouts should be altered, without grandfathering. Also, subsidies should be given to build wise (!!!) flood prevention infrastructures, and those communities which do not want to implement them should be punished. If you want to build on exposed beaches, you should pay for your foolishness, no matter how picturesque!!!!
Oren wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
I think there was enough warning of what was coming for most people, but, yes, the federal weather service stopped issuing warnings because Sandy wasn't a real hurricane anymore, and the local weathercasters were supposed to take over. I think this is being addressed for future events.
This always happens ... The lawyers like nitpicking. A prudent homeowner assesses the diverse risks and asks his insurance agent what coverage to get. Then prays for good quality advice ...
same as yours - it's so risky that no private insurance company would touch it so the government has so step in. But the last time I've spoken to an insurance agent (of a private insurance company, perhaps it's important to note), their explanation sounded more graceful than \"subsidizing someone else's bad decisions\". She was basically saying that noone is ever completely safe from flood, regardless of where the house is located (i.e. middle of corn fields or beach front) and so it's everyone's problem, hence it's the government's problem.
never actually reaches anywhere close to my house, but the last time it did, the explanation that \"noone is ever safe\" sounded somewhat reasonable to me.
I suppose there's always Noah.
More pork than Spam.
I thought pork wasn't allowed anymore.
Oh, it's changed the climate a lot in DC and other capitols around the world. It is all about politics, after all.
DC is the capitol of hot air!!!
up when he was 7 years old:
as in "feel responsible enough" to pay for it?
I would ask you to read my comments again. My point was that whether they have insurance or not, they expect someone to bail them out when they make poor decisions.
That is not true at all. It just has not happened in 74 years. (1938)
That is why they call these things "100 year storms" The history channel type shows have been predicting this hurricane for years. It was not a unique storm for that latitude, The only thing unusual was the path.
The same was true in New Orleans.
*LOTs* of people anticipated the results some made the predictions very public. Like Katrina where LSU had a hard copy report published 3 years ahead of time bean counters discounted the perditions in the clear hope that the gotcha would not be on their watch.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.