Currently only about 4% of NFIP policies are subsidized. The problem is that the concentration of those subsidies in older, less affluent communities built before mapping leads to a disparet impact in NFIP reforms.
There are also serious questions about the lack of granularity in NFIP ratings catagories; here in NYC most Sandy inundated structures experienced little damage beyond “wet carpet” effects, yet the projected ‘actuarially sound’ premiums are the same as for fragile balloon frame structures on the Ohio River. There is a lot of work to be done and the NFIP needs greater resources to do better science.
The state of agent competancy is a national disgrace. NYC did beta testing and found a consistant lack of consistency: instead of getting identical quotes based on identical information, agents came back with wildly different premiums. WYO is a failure!
I can call NFIP and talk to 6 different people looking at the same EC and get 6 different premiums. I sit here and listen to the webinars given by FEMA employees and ask them very specific questions and get the wrong answer most of the time on some of the most basic questions (that I already know the answer to). The state of FEMA is a national disgrace and thinking you can fix it with more money is typical liberal horse shit.
Your vulgarity is unneccesary, Troll. I said the NFIP needs more money for better science – and ignoring your attack on what you presume to be my politics, yes, they could use some $$ for better training.
The WYO program lacks any form of competancy testing; there’s not a state in the Union where I could get a brokers license by remaining semi-conscious through two webinars.
What sort of conservative horse shit do you suggest as a remedy? The private market left in 1926 and shows no desire to come back – and they cannot negotiate flood plain management codes, which is the requirement for a community to join the NFIP. Or are you so ignorant that you thought the NFIP was only about insurance?
Currently only about 4% of NFIP policies are subsidized. The problem is that the concentration of those subsidies in older, less affluent communities built before mapping leads to a disparet impact in NFIP reforms.
There are also serious questions about the lack of granularity in NFIP ratings catagories; here in NYC most Sandy inundated structures experienced little damage beyond “wet carpet” effects, yet the projected ‘actuarially sound’ premiums are the same as for fragile balloon frame structures on the Ohio River. There is a lot of work to be done and the NFIP needs greater resources to do better science.
The state of agent competancy is a national disgrace. NYC did beta testing and found a consistant lack of consistency: instead of getting identical quotes based on identical information, agents came back with wildly different premiums. WYO is a failure!
Elizabeth Malone-
I can call NFIP and talk to 6 different people looking at the same EC and get 6 different premiums. I sit here and listen to the webinars given by FEMA employees and ask them very specific questions and get the wrong answer most of the time on some of the most basic questions (that I already know the answer to). The state of FEMA is a national disgrace and thinking you can fix it with more money is typical liberal horse shit.
Your vulgarity is unneccesary, Troll. I said the NFIP needs more money for better science – and ignoring your attack on what you presume to be my politics, yes, they could use some $$ for better training.
The WYO program lacks any form of competancy testing; there’s not a state in the Union where I could get a brokers license by remaining semi-conscious through two webinars.
What sort of conservative horse shit do you suggest as a remedy? The private market left in 1926 and shows no desire to come back – and they cannot negotiate flood plain management codes, which is the requirement for a community to join the NFIP. Or are you so ignorant that you thought the NFIP was only about insurance?
I use the private flood market every day nincompoop :)