Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah, but what if I disagree with an insurer's quantification of my risk? There doesn't seem to be much recourse (don't pay for REQUIRED insurance is not a feasible option) They have the resources to spin the numbers the way they want, I might have a better risk algorithm but am powerless when I don't have access to the same numbers they use.
If the behavior of OTHERS inflates my insurance premiumns, why don't I have an actionable claim against the malfeasors?
Welcome to the real world.
You seem to think that homeowners have it so easy, but millions (myself included) are REQUIRED to pay for flood insurance, based on a tiny chance of flooding. The government spins the numbers, increasing those in the flood map, to increase their income. Then you are forced to get your own insurance, or automatically put on the government's insurance. Everyone is affected, rich and poor. Well, except for renters.
You need to get over the idea that you're a victim because you're poor.
FWIW, as a low-income renter always at risk of gentrification and displacement, I consider myself a negative stakeholder in my neighborhood; i.e. what's good for the neighborhood is generally bad for me.
As I've been saying for years, what use is expending time and effort to improve your neighborhood if you are priced out in the process and therefore never experience the payoff for your efforts?
Some seek to make a positive difference in their micro- macro communities and do so without an expectation of a financial reward. Some view the work itself as the reward. Some learn new skills doing so. Some make contacts they would never have otherwise.
At the other end of the spectrum, some seek to destroy their micro- macro communities and do so because they have no better expectations of themselves.
Ah, but what if I disagree with an insurer's quantification of my risk? There doesn't seem to be much recourse (don't pay for REQUIRED insurance is not a feasible option) They have the resources to spin the numbers the way they want, I might have a better risk algorithm but am powerless when I don't have access to the same numbers they use.
If the behavior of OTHERS inflates my insurance premiumns, why don't I have an actionable claim against the malfeasors?
Actuarial skills are in high demand and pay reasonably well. Opportunities for advancement are high. An undergraduate degree with a major in Actuarial Sciences is typically required for serious consideration.
Earn the education, get the job, put in the time and effort to understand probabilities and stats, corporate finance and exceed your employer's expectations to be taken seriously.
Someone else asked if there should be a looting and destruction tax on the black community.
We already have punitive geographic taxes on neighborhood dysfunction. These taxes are disproportionately paid by lower-income residents in the form of inflated insurance premiums. Auto insurance rates vary by zip code, so people who cannot afford to live in the 'right' zip code pay this tax in their insurance bill.
This tax is even a feature included in Obamacare, where health insurance premiums vary by zip code.
Insurance premiums are not "taxes."
The word you're looking for is "costs."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
