BP Oil Spill Claims Chief Braces for Surge in Filings
N.Y. Regulator Issues ‘Cease and Desist’ Order to Car-Sharing Firm RelayRides
Tornadoes Spin Through Texas Towns After Dark, Killing Six
U.S., European Retailers Divided on Safety Plan for Bangladesh Factories
Government to Share Cyber Security Information with Private Sector
50 Top Apps for Independent Agents
Medical Liability Market Profitable But Deteriorating Results Expected: Fitch
Three Insurance Companies Placed in Liquidation in IllinoisFree Newsletters
Sign up to receive insurance news alerts!Most Popular
Current Issue
Editors and Contributors
-
Andrea WellsAgency Compensation Playbook: 2013 Agency Salary Survey -
Andrew G. SimpsonHow Process Improvement Drives Agency Profitability -
Stephanie JonesThe Acquisition Cycle -
Don JerglerIndustry Predictions -
Chris BurandReasonable Compensation -
Andrea WellsPersonal Lines: How Technology is Changing the Way Agents Do Business
Good to see insurancejournal is giving in to the liberal media myth of global warming … Find me one model that has been accurate, just ONE.
just curious…if ANYONE other than Al Gore had been so outspoken about Global Warming, would it really be the “liberal vs. conservative” issue it is today?
Just because you think that the effects of global warming are a big joke does not mean that people should ignore that fact the earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes and flooding etc can and do have effects that people should prepare and be prepared for. These natural disasters are not caused by the liberal media but by Mother Nature herself. I thoght that insurance people understood this……but maybe I am wrong.
Insured: “Do I need earthquake or flood insurance on my home?”
Agent: “No you don’t….Natural climate disasters are a myth of the liberal media.”
Can anyone say E&O??
Except that you’ve overlooked 1 very crucial element: Regardless of the truth or falsity of Global Warming, the IPCC is NOT a credible source of science and information. Simple as that.
Important for local governments to understand the implications — especially community governments who are considering comprehensive plans that allow for expansion of housing and urban development centers near tidal creeks and other ‘waterfront.’ There are lots of towns along the East Coast located on tributaries of the Potomac River, Susquehanna, York, etc. These tidal tributaries will also experience some water level rise due to their connection to the Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. Building taxpayer-funded massive waterfront concrete walls to prevent flooding of developed areas is going to result in huge tidal wetland losses, which in turn affects water quality and the ability of fish and seafood to reproduce–food and jobs. Better to advise tidal communities to implement waterfront development setbacks now, to allow for tidal river rise inland. This will help tidal marshes and our water quality to continue without requiring after=the-fact taxpayer funded water treatment plants and flooding prevention measures. Land developers looking to develop ‘waterfront’ need to work with local governments to use incentives such as TDRs, and PDRs to move development ‘downtown’ and leave natural areas along tidal creeks to absorb flooding and continue the production of oxygen and water vapor for rainfall, and fish/seafood for food and jobs. That would still allow for citizens access to water for recreation, beautify the community, but avoid the costly impacts of flood prevention measures that also deteriorate the natural resources we depend upon.
Heartwarming to see that even readers of stodgy business journals still have a fair number of flat-earthers on board. Which is exactly what the conclusions of the report are all about.
Let me sell you some land in a flood plain in Louisiana. You’ll be safe.
Hey, it’s a Reuters story about a mythical U.N. sponsored problem. IJ should be ashamed for wasting the space it took to present the “story”
I wouldn’t subject my cockatoo to having to poop on the paper that this report is printed on.
The insurance industry understands risk management – something that climate-change deniers clearly do not understand.
The UN is irrelevent on just about any issue, including the global warming myth.