Hey Congress, Hurricanes and Health Care Have a Lot in Common: Bloomberg View

By Elisabeth Rosenthal | September 18, 2017

  • September 18, 2017 at 9:41 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 10

    I disagree that a flood insurance ‘mandate’ is needed. Freedom of choice works best in a free society.

    So, the choices I see as the most sensible:

    1. Buy flood insurance to live in a low risk flood plain or receive no mortgage. Keep it in force, or be cited, fined, then, possibly, evicted.

    2. Move out of a high risk flood plain or receive a diminishing payment for loss of property insured by NFIP, intended to phase out coverage over 10 years.

    3. Legislate local laws for banks issuing mortgages of any kind to require SEMI-annual checks of compliance with NFIP and flood plain risk management ordinances. Establish links between all financial institutions issuing mortgages and NFIP Administrative offices.

    4. Mitigate the flood risk through a 50 year withdrawal of risks in dwellings from high and moderate flood risk plains … to higher grounds. Establish programs for local governments to purchase ‘abandoned’ properties, to re-purpose them as parks, water-impervious warehouses, etc.

    The above plan is no longer an option, it’s necessary to reduce the portion of GDP spent on flood losses. It’s the bear’s way or the highway!

    Finally, the last section, where the author mentions 10s of billions to hundreds of billions of dollars of damages is hyperbole to try to support these ‘mandates’ pushed by freedom-hating liberals. No estimate I’ve seen for either hurricane is anywhere near $100 billion.

  • September 18, 2017 at 10:21 am
    Ron says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 0

    As more insurance companies incorporate by-peril rating, the best solution would be to remove the flood exclusion and charge the appropriate rate for that peril.

    • September 18, 2017 at 4:24 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 7

      Good. Does flood peril charge apply to policies NOT exposed to flood risk? Uh oh! A dilemma!

      • September 19, 2017 at 8:43 am
        Ron says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 0

        Why would that create a dilemma?

        That would be a very small percentage of homes in the US.

        While it may not be perfect, it does get the government out of a portion of the insurance business without displacing millions of people and thousands of businesses, and uses the insurance mechanism properly.

      • September 20, 2017 at 3:05 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 1

        Dilemma = unwillingness of unexposed risks to subsidize other risks who ARE exposed to the flood peril.

        • September 20, 2017 at 4:13 pm
          Ron says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          Insurance is subsidization. Otherwise, it would not work.

          Nearly every home is exposed to flood. If you rate by peril, those who are more exposed, pay more. But you also need those who will likely never see a flood to pay something.

          Do you even know how the insurance mechanism works?

          • September 21, 2017 at 3:48 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Hey, Ron; are you getting annoyed by being refuted by me so much on your lies?

            Subsidization is a social principle. It implies some pay more than their fair share to allow some to underpay their fair share.

            Insurance includes risk rating according to risk class which is intended to cover long term costs accurately by risk class. The ‘subsidies’ you claim exist are SHORT TERM variances in actual costs from the long term risk class cost.

            If you want to discuss insurance terminology, be sure to consult with an accurate textbook before you try to lie and deceive naive readers.

            I’m well versed on insurance terminology. Your lack of understanding some of the basic principles makes me doubt your sincerity in this discussion and others.

        • September 21, 2017 at 3:23 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 1

          Wrong. Social insurance is subsidization. TRUE, free market insurance is pooling. Very different. Ask if you want more details.

          • September 21, 2017 at 3:24 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Ooops! Pooling with classification of risks into homogeneous groups with similar risks and costs. .. not ‘pooling’. Bear culpa.

  • September 18, 2017 at 12:18 pm
    Joe says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 1

    Federal Mandates solve nothing. Just end up in fraud and poor coverage. American generosity seem to be working we need to promote and encourage more personal responsibility and local safety nets.

    • September 18, 2017 at 3:29 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 10

      We have seen what Federal Mandates have done in Health Insurance and it is not a pretty picture.

      • September 18, 2017 at 4:25 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 8

        Actually, it’s an ugly picture for the WHOLE SYSTEM; i.e. health care insurers, insureds / non-insureds, and health care providers.
        Uggghhh!

        • September 18, 2017 at 5:49 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 8

          Polar, I had a young man in his early 30’s ask me about the insurance industry as a vocation to get into the other day. I told him he might want to find something else to do. 10 years ago, I might have recruited him to come into the agency. Now, not so much. Everything is so messed up now and companies are acting weird. We haven’t gotten rid of the Progressive element yet. Perhaps in three more years, we will have most weeded out and things will be better.

          • September 18, 2017 at 7:10 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 8

            Agree. Socialist attitudes prevail despite most states having conservative / Republican governors, thus, conservative insurance dept execs. But the worm is turning, albeit slowly. It looks like a few more states will soon flip from Dem Govs to Republican Govs to try to fix the mess created by the Socialists; e.g. IL, CA, CT, …

          • September 19, 2017 at 8:45 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 0

            Agent,

            You have been the one championing the value and stability of the Independent Agency system. Now you are advising someone against it as a career. Which one is it?

          • September 20, 2017 at 3:07 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 2

            That’s not contradictory. I read very clearly that Agent thinks it isn’t a good field to get into AT THIS TIME.

          • September 21, 2017 at 12:27 pm
            Confused says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Last month Agent was all about the IA system, but now he’s not. So what happened in the last 30 days to change his mind about the future of his industry?

          • September 21, 2017 at 3:28 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            Pssst: Agent’s post includes mention of the Progressive element, which has gotten to a level that is harmful to the industry’s outlook. Ask Agent for details that he sees. I see similar things, and they include support for SP HC, a la Bernie ‘Madoff-like Ponzi Scheme’ Sander’s SP plan via expanded MediCare.

  • September 20, 2017 at 8:16 am
    Ron says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Agent,

    Can you explain exactly what I miscomprehended?

    Have you not consistently criticized articles and comments prophesizing the end of the insurance agency distribution channel?

    Did you not just state you advised someone against pursuing a career as and agent?

    Being an agency owner is either a solid, stable opportunity or it is not.

  • September 21, 2017 at 10:44 am
    HoustonAgent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    I really appreciate all the points this article brought to focus.

    Many people in Texas and in other parts of the United States are struggling with income loss. The oil industry took a dive, the retail industry is going bust, people can’t find full-time jobs with benefits anymore, my partner and I make about a third less than we did three years ago and had to downsize our life. Our income is decreasing not rising as we age. Although, I do keep my flood policy and insurance active at all times. It’s the one thing I will continue to pay until I have to choose between food and insurance.

    But for many people, with the cost of auto insurance rising in Texas, their budgets are being squeezed to epic proportions. Additional pressure to purchase policies is not the route to go with people. Houston has been building homes closer and closer to bayous over the years. We need to rethink our infrastructure, buy-out flood prone areas, add additional bayous, and throw every dime we can into reworking our water drainage system.

    This is going to cost a lot of money, but we need to prep now, because this is the third major flooding event three years in a row. May 2015, April 2016, and August 2017 were all major flooding events here in Houston. This is not the last hurricane or flooding event we are going to have, and insurers are going to start pulling out if these catastrophic events continue. We learned from LA. When the insurer’s pull out, so does the population. Who wants to live in a house that floods once a year?

    • September 22, 2017 at 5:55 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      Houston, we see reports that up to 500,000 cars/trucks have been destroyed or damaged. That is big time dollars since Auto will pay on physical damage when a home may not be covered if there is no flood insurance. We wish you the best down there. Hope your agency was not flooded as well.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features