Some people just don\’t get it. This goes far beyond \”territorial rating\”. If the insurance industry suffers another bad year, some carriers and reinsurers will go out of business (yes, they might make way for new \”opportunists\” capital to come in – in many cases they may just offer a short-term fix, others will stick around) and some will suffer enough to hurt its shareholders and make them second guess less exposed coastal areas (i.e. the Northeast and Northwest), middle-America (New Madrid, Tornado Alley, etc.) and be gun-shy to write anything that has a chance for a blizzard or Nor\’Easter hit. Not to mention what the financial rating companies will do to their long-term outlook. This is when the economy will suffer (and for that matter, the global economy) and the entire country will feel the effects.
Do you think that another terrorist attack in New York City is just New York\’s problem if the financial district gets wiped out for a few months?
BOB, I always vote the \”right\” way, so take your socialist comment and put it where your first comment to this issue belongs. This is an issue that any Republican or American for that matter should be concerned with.
Just out of curiosity, where do you stand on the notion that global climate changes are being accelerated due to human intervention? I bet you think that\’s a socialist ploy begun by greenpeace to force you to give up your 8-cylinder pick-up…
Bob, Mark, & Compman…glad to know at least a few other people out there get it.
I think the basic premise is that of personal responsibility and accountability. I have no problem with anyone\’s choice about where and how to live…just don\’t cry to me when it comes back to bite you. I don\’t care if it\’s hurricanes wrecking your home or the clogged artery from a life of slurping french fries and smoking two packs a day.
Unfortunately, very few people are willing to take that upon themselves in a society that is increasingly populated with those that feel they are \”entitled\” to certain rights without shouldering the burden of paying for them. And why should they bother when recent history tells us that Big Brother will step in with our tax money to bail them out? Welfare – Part II.
Ladies & Gentlemen – please remember that this is a capitalistic society. Socialis not now, has never been, and will never be the answer to these types of issues.
I agree with Mark about not living in an area prone to disaster. That\’s why I chose not to live in the Gulf, or California, or New Orleans, or Tennessee, etc.
I just believe the weather has gotten far worse than anyone weighing the risk of living or vacationing or opening a business in a prone area (let\’s face it, even the cat modelists got it wrong) could have imagined. And these spikes in weather will affect areas with very little exposure as well, so building a fund (at least partial or cap relief) will come in handy more than anyone can realize at this point. I know all about past lessons – but speaking of past lessons – if there is anything to be learned from the past two years – past 5 years if you count deliberate catastrophe, is that past history doesn\’t count anymore. What we are seeing now is unprecidented.
By the way, I like most of us reading this publication, make a living selling privately offered insurance (including cat cover and political risk), but what if there is no cover left to sell? At any price? Gee, that\’s sort of going on right now…
John, the point is that those in a high risk area should shoulder the insurance expense. Trying to spread the cost of that risk to people living in low risk area defeats the principles of insurance. Let the gulf coast set up their own high risk cat plan if they want/need it; just don\’t force those of us in low risk areas to particpate.
And yes, I do beleive global warming is probably greatly affected by the fact we have 6 billion people screwing it up. Just because I am a stong fiscal and social conservative doesn\’t mean I can\’t be a conservationist and I realize the world is not flat. But that is another subject we can get in a pissing match about another time.
What I really think is that there is no simple answer. I certainly do not want to take funds out of my pocket for someone\’s poor judgement in where they live, but I do not want to see a collapsing economy either.
I think there is already money enough in federal government vaults without going into the pockets of the hard-working citizens of this country. The problem is that it goes to other countries\’ defense and distaster aid instead of being ear-marked for our own increasing needs (but then, there are ways and means in that money going elsewhere too – assuming you don\’t want an excuse to import oil from Canada, who has more than enough already refined to share).
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.
Some people just don\’t get it. This goes far beyond \”territorial rating\”. If the insurance industry suffers another bad year, some carriers and reinsurers will go out of business (yes, they might make way for new \”opportunists\” capital to come in – in many cases they may just offer a short-term fix, others will stick around) and some will suffer enough to hurt its shareholders and make them second guess less exposed coastal areas (i.e. the Northeast and Northwest), middle-America (New Madrid, Tornado Alley, etc.) and be gun-shy to write anything that has a chance for a blizzard or Nor\’Easter hit. Not to mention what the financial rating companies will do to their long-term outlook. This is when the economy will suffer (and for that matter, the global economy) and the entire country will feel the effects.
Do you think that another terrorist attack in New York City is just New York\’s problem if the financial district gets wiped out for a few months?
BOB, I always vote the \”right\” way, so take your socialist comment and put it where your first comment to this issue belongs. This is an issue that any Republican or American for that matter should be concerned with.
Just out of curiosity, where do you stand on the notion that global climate changes are being accelerated due to human intervention? I bet you think that\’s a socialist ploy begun by greenpeace to force you to give up your 8-cylinder pick-up…
Bob, Mark, & Compman…glad to know at least a few other people out there get it.
I think the basic premise is that of personal responsibility and accountability. I have no problem with anyone\’s choice about where and how to live…just don\’t cry to me when it comes back to bite you. I don\’t care if it\’s hurricanes wrecking your home or the clogged artery from a life of slurping french fries and smoking two packs a day.
Unfortunately, very few people are willing to take that upon themselves in a society that is increasingly populated with those that feel they are \”entitled\” to certain rights without shouldering the burden of paying for them. And why should they bother when recent history tells us that Big Brother will step in with our tax money to bail them out? Welfare – Part II.
Ladies & Gentlemen – please remember that this is a capitalistic society. Socialis not now, has never been, and will never be the answer to these types of issues.
I agree with Mark about not living in an area prone to disaster. That\’s why I chose not to live in the Gulf, or California, or New Orleans, or Tennessee, etc.
I just believe the weather has gotten far worse than anyone weighing the risk of living or vacationing or opening a business in a prone area (let\’s face it, even the cat modelists got it wrong) could have imagined. And these spikes in weather will affect areas with very little exposure as well, so building a fund (at least partial or cap relief) will come in handy more than anyone can realize at this point. I know all about past lessons – but speaking of past lessons – if there is anything to be learned from the past two years – past 5 years if you count deliberate catastrophe, is that past history doesn\’t count anymore. What we are seeing now is unprecidented.
By the way, I like most of us reading this publication, make a living selling privately offered insurance (including cat cover and political risk), but what if there is no cover left to sell? At any price? Gee, that\’s sort of going on right now…
John, the point is that those in a high risk area should shoulder the insurance expense. Trying to spread the cost of that risk to people living in low risk area defeats the principles of insurance. Let the gulf coast set up their own high risk cat plan if they want/need it; just don\’t force those of us in low risk areas to particpate.
And yes, I do beleive global warming is probably greatly affected by the fact we have 6 billion people screwing it up. Just because I am a stong fiscal and social conservative doesn\’t mean I can\’t be a conservationist and I realize the world is not flat. But that is another subject we can get in a pissing match about another time.
OK, touche, touche…
What I really think is that there is no simple answer. I certainly do not want to take funds out of my pocket for someone\’s poor judgement in where they live, but I do not want to see a collapsing economy either.
I think there is already money enough in federal government vaults without going into the pockets of the hard-working citizens of this country. The problem is that it goes to other countries\’ defense and distaster aid instead of being ear-marked for our own increasing needs (but then, there are ways and means in that money going elsewhere too – assuming you don\’t want an excuse to import oil from Canada, who has more than enough already refined to share).
Again, a discussion for another time.
Good sparring with you. Have a good one Bob.
John, there you are with that hand back in the goverment\’s pocket again.