GOP Platform Calls for Natural Disaster Insurance Reform
National News • September 5, 2008
The Republican National Committee pledged its support to improve federal natural disaster insurance as part of its platform. The GOP's support of federal disaster insurance reform follows the ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: RE: why?
Posted On: September 5, 2008, 3:49 pm CDT
Posted By: justaguy
Comment:
Well, Bill's idea sounds good on the surface, although I would have suggested Cat 3 or higher ...were I inclined to make the suggestion. The problem is exactly as bob points out, and momma echoes.
It's simply not the governments job.
Ok, I live in the vicinity of hurricanes, just SW of Houston, so this is not a selfish opinon. But, why should Joe-taxpayer in the Midwest need to subsidize my hurricane insurance ...and that's what it is - a subsidy.
Read the constitution, and learn what the Federal Government's job truly should be. Anything more is not only an incorrect use of power, but as we all really know (those of us that can actually think), it's nearly doomed to failure, and worse, open to fraud and co-mingling like Soc Security.
Both sides of the political isle are doing nothing but pandering here. It's a feel-good move, because something ought to be done. Well, it shouldn't!
Ok, now that's the real deal.
But, let me say this as a slightly less strict opinion. The flood program might be a little bit different. It can flood (mudslide) darn near anywhere in the country if it rains hard & long enough. So, maybe that's something where the Federal Government should possibly insert themselves (let me hold my nose). Except for a few cases, it's an unforseen disaster.
But if you are going to build a home on top of the San Andreas fault, or in New Orleans (a hole where you need a ladder to see if there are white caps on the Gulf, or position your beach house 500 feet from the coast to get that awesome view, then you should know it's a risky proposition and you might get burned.
Forseeable disaster should be a risk born by the individual taker. Buy insurance. If you can't afford insurance and you still want the awesome ambiance, risk it. But, don't make me pay for your risky behavior via a mandatory Federal program.
The only reason this issue is getting any traction by most legislators is a combination of greed (the ability to use that money for other purposes) and insurance company lobbyist activity, because the companys no longer believe they are in the business of risk. Every insurance company, today, is in search of riskless income. They should have been bankers ...but, then they would not have made nearly as much money.
Thank you very much.
Subject: RE: RE: why?
It's simply not the governments job.
Ok, I live in the vicinity of hurricanes, just SW of Houston, so this is not a selfish opinon. But, why should Joe-taxpayer in the Midwest need to subsidize my hurricane insurance ...and that's what it is - a subsidy.
Read the constitution, and learn what the Federal Government's job truly should be. Anything more is not only an incorrect use of power, but as we all really know (those of us that can actually think), it's nearly doomed to failure, and worse, open to fraud and co-mingling like Soc Security.
Both sides of the political isle are doing nothing but pandering here. It's a feel-good move, because something ought to be done. Well, it shouldn't!
Ok, now that's the real deal.
But, let me say this as a slightly less strict opinion. The flood program might be a little bit different. It can flood (mudslide) darn near anywhere in the country if it rains hard & long enough. So, maybe that's something where the Federal Government should possibly insert themselves (let me hold my nose). Except for a few cases, it's an unforseen disaster.
But if you are going to build a home on top of the San Andreas fault, or in New Orleans (a hole where you need a ladder to see if there are white caps on the Gulf, or position your beach house 500 feet from the coast to get that awesome view, then you should know it's a risky proposition and you might get burned.
Forseeable disaster should be a risk born by the individual taker. Buy insurance. If you can't afford insurance and you still want the awesome ambiance, risk it. But, don't make me pay for your risky behavior via a mandatory Federal program.
The only reason this issue is getting any traction by most legislators is a combination of greed (the ability to use that money for other purposes) and insurance company lobbyist activity, because the companys no longer believe they are in the business of risk. Every insurance company, today, is in search of riskless income. They should have been bankers ...but, then they would not have made nearly as much money.
Thank you very much.