Keeping Flood Insurance Above Water: Commentary

By Mark Anquillare, Verisk Analytics | January 25, 2018

  • January 25, 2018 at 9:37 am
    Tax Cuts 4 PolaRich Bears says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    Here’s a set of ideas to improve the proposed Infrastructure Rebuilding Plan proposed by PresidenTrump and others; 1. allocate adequate funds to revise flood maps, 2. buy land at high risk and return it to farming purposes or parks, and 3. elevate roadways in moderate risk flood plains so as to avoid typical flooding.

    • January 25, 2018 at 4:02 pm
      Confused says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 1

      and where is all that money coming from? and if you say “we will use expected tax benefits to fund this” my reply will be you can’t do that because (a) you have no idea how much that will be (b) you have no idea how much your options will actually cost (c) there’s no guarantee we’ll even have that money since it’s based off of projected growth and (d) some of that money is already ear-marked for other things we were promised.

      we’re deep in debt as a country and you want to pay to buy whole swaths of land and elevate roadways, but how do you propose we are actually going to pay for it without going deeper in debt?

  • January 25, 2018 at 1:18 pm
    Charles Ford says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 1

    This article is funny. The idea that government, once a participant instead of a referee, can ever withdraw is laughable and absurd.

    America is the only country in the world where property is not covered for flood and you can thank Government for that

  • January 25, 2018 at 3:54 pm
    Richard Hart says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    Interesting article, though this topic is certainly not new. With NFIP being both underfunded and politically hamstrung from ever being run effectively this is another can that will get kicked down the road until either: 1) the government compels all homeowners to buy flood coverage (even if you live on a mountaintop), 2.) the feds drop it because it is simply too costly (and abandons it to the private marketplace), or 3) Allow private insurers and reinsurers to pre-reserve loss dollars ahead of flood loss events to build a catastrophe fund that has tax-protected investment earnings. My money is on 1 or 2. Nice article!

  • January 26, 2018 at 10:35 am
    KF says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    Important note, the current extension ends on February 8, not February 9 as indicated in the article.

    • January 26, 2018 at 11:44 am
      Andrew G. Simpson says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 0

      Thanks very much for the correction. That was my error, not Verisk’s.



Add a Comment

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

*