Sounds like the boys locker room. What I
like is us paying to rebuild New Orleans
at taxpayer expense. What will we do when it is trashed again? Why more of my
dollars for sure. That sounds logical.
It seems fair that those willing to live in areas prone to flooding should be willing to pay more for the increased risk. Just as those who live in areas continullay threatened by wild fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. should pay for the increased exposure.
Whatever happened to rates based on exposures? Actuaries still are around, aren’t they? If the higher cost of insurance (and realistically – – is an increase of 15% on $400 going to break anyone?) cannot be handled by the person living in the area subject to the higher risk event, that person should just move to a place they can afford.
If you cannot afford something, don’t buy it! Duh.
Until we revamp the entire flood program so that the fed’s continue with the program, but all HO policies contain the flood peril and insurance companies collect the premium — forward a portion of the premium to the fed’s — it must be seamless to the policyholder. When we require policyholders to get a HO policy, a flood policy, earthquake policy and a wind policy — then we are asking for problems. Too many people in flood prone areas are not buying the coverage —- or because their mortgage company may not be forcing them to purchase the coverage, they don’t want to purchase it. We have to stop the subsidies to people who chose not to purchase coverage.
CA Agent hit it right on the head…Congress’ current approval rating is even less than that of President Bush, whose rating is so far in the tank that even if he could run for a 3rd term it is unlikely that he would even be a backfield candidate. I think we ought to flush the toilet that is D.C. and repopulate it with real Americans who have a grasp on what it is like to live in the U.S. today. I know: That’s a pipe dream…there are too many citizens who just don’t care enough to vote or even keep up with the news. Pathetic.
I’m pretty sure most citizens keep up with the news & vote, however, remember when our illustrious politicians wanted to reduce the voting age because of low voter turn out? Look what we get for our taxes! They certainly live in a dream world don’t they?
I wouldn’t mind paying a 15% increase if the premium was only $400. I live a mile and a half from the beach (Bayshore, not the ocean), yet I’m paying $1200 a year for flood insurance. I’ve lived there for 15 years through numerous nor’easters and tropical storms, without once having to file a claim. Add to that my $1100 homeowners policy and I’m paying $2300 a year to insure my home, which is worth about $500k at inflated NY metro area prices.
Instead of price increases they should force everyone living in a flood zone to buy flood insurance or otherwise be ineligible for federal disaster relief if and when a flood strikes.
Let’s hope they do NOT do anything. Anything they “do,” is beneficial only to their own pockets and those of their special interest group lobbyists and rent-seekers, and destructive to decent people.
As that keen observer of the human condition Groucho Mark defined politics: “the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, coming up with the wrong solution, and applying it incorrectly.”
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Sounds like the boys locker room. What I
like is us paying to rebuild New Orleans
at taxpayer expense. What will we do when it is trashed again? Why more of my
dollars for sure. That sounds logical.
You must be joking. They’re too darn busy with their political infighting to do anything for the country.
It seems fair that those willing to live in areas prone to flooding should be willing to pay more for the increased risk. Just as those who live in areas continullay threatened by wild fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. should pay for the increased exposure.
Whatever happened to rates based on exposures? Actuaries still are around, aren’t they? If the higher cost of insurance (and realistically – – is an increase of 15% on $400 going to break anyone?) cannot be handled by the person living in the area subject to the higher risk event, that person should just move to a place they can afford.
If you cannot afford something, don’t buy it! Duh.
Until we revamp the entire flood program so that the fed’s continue with the program, but all HO policies contain the flood peril and insurance companies collect the premium — forward a portion of the premium to the fed’s — it must be seamless to the policyholder. When we require policyholders to get a HO policy, a flood policy, earthquake policy and a wind policy — then we are asking for problems. Too many people in flood prone areas are not buying the coverage —- or because their mortgage company may not be forcing them to purchase the coverage, they don’t want to purchase it. We have to stop the subsidies to people who chose not to purchase coverage.
CA Agent hit it right on the head…Congress’ current approval rating is even less than that of President Bush, whose rating is so far in the tank that even if he could run for a 3rd term it is unlikely that he would even be a backfield candidate. I think we ought to flush the toilet that is D.C. and repopulate it with real Americans who have a grasp on what it is like to live in the U.S. today. I know: That’s a pipe dream…there are too many citizens who just don’t care enough to vote or even keep up with the news. Pathetic.
Got that right! Myth: Politicians & Promises Reality: Politicians, little enthusiasm, unpopular steps. What’s that word? Oh yeah, Eunic!!
I’m pretty sure most citizens keep up with the news & vote, however, remember when our illustrious politicians wanted to reduce the voting age because of low voter turn out? Look what we get for our taxes! They certainly live in a dream world don’t they?
I wouldn’t mind paying a 15% increase if the premium was only $400. I live a mile and a half from the beach (Bayshore, not the ocean), yet I’m paying $1200 a year for flood insurance. I’ve lived there for 15 years through numerous nor’easters and tropical storms, without once having to file a claim. Add to that my $1100 homeowners policy and I’m paying $2300 a year to insure my home, which is worth about $500k at inflated NY metro area prices.
Instead of price increases they should force everyone living in a flood zone to buy flood insurance or otherwise be ineligible for federal disaster relief if and when a flood strikes.
“I think we ought to flush the toilet that is D.C. ”
himself,
Please don’t insult toilets by grouping them with politicians.
Let’s hope they do NOT do anything. Anything they “do,” is beneficial only to their own pockets and those of their special interest group lobbyists and rent-seekers, and destructive to decent people.
As that keen observer of the human condition Groucho Mark defined politics: “the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, coming up with the wrong solution, and applying it incorrectly.”