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.
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,801,130 times
Reputation: 1932
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
The news at the time was chock full of developed property owners in NJ and on LIn who owned free and clear and did not insure their flood risk. Nonetheless, they expected Government to make them whole and were very disappointed when their uninsured losses were capped.
It is my understanding that purchasing flood insurance was a condition imposed on some beneficiaries of the "free ride" , specifically those residing within a 100 year flood plain. Those who flooded outside the 100 year flood area were not required to purchase flood insurance as a condition.
Congress, Republican majority House and Democrat controlled Senate approved the ginormous Sandy Relief package including hundreds of pork pies unrelated to and in states not impacted by Sandy, necessary to get the vote.
Since Sandy, the number of US properties insured by NFIP has declined by nearly 500,000.
Owners let their policies lapse when Congress imposed round 1 of the start of aligning premiums to risks. No doubt many who did expect government to pay towards their losses despite the decision to forego insurance. Reportedly half of the lapsed policies are in Texas and Florida.
The US had more major floods in 2016 than in any year on record.
Reading that 500,000 more properties are now uninsured sounds just like the healthcare debate. Fewer, insured means rates are tied to fewer homes at most risk that will suffer greater losses.
Further, politics helps keep the taxpayer on the hook to cover losses due to flooding even if the home has no flood insurance.
People knowing the government bailed out others means more are more likely to drop insurance even if they can afford it.
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,801,130 times
Reputation: 1932
I guess everyone in Florida should be looking at what is just off African coast right now. I have been watching it grow for about 2 days now.
Tropical Weather Outlook NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL 200 AM EDT Thu Aug 3 2017
For the North Atlantic...Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico:
1. A large area of showers and thunderstorms near the west coast of Africa is associated with a tropical wave. Environmental conditions are forecast to be conducive for gradual development, and a tropical depression could form by early next week over the tropical Atlantic Ocean. This system is forecast to move toward the west or west- northwest at 10 to 15 mph for the next several days. * Formation chance through 48 hours...low...20 percent. * Formation chance through 5 days...medium...50 percent.
There is a huge amount of water associated with this hurricane.
"The average hurricane season has about two Cape Verde hurricanes , which are often the largest and most intense storms of the season due to having plenty of warm open ocean over which to develop before encountering land or other factors prompting weakening."
It is way too early to say where this hurricane will go. But overall it is likely too late to run-out and buy flood insurance since there is a 30 day waiting period.
IIRC, the last time this issue was raised it was governors and residents of red states that made the biggest uproar. Why is this relevant? Because they are the ones who spend the most time spouting off about "big government" and "bail outs" and "government subsidies". And are the ones who deny that we are seeing more flooding problems due to climate change. Not to mention "moral hazard".
"In economics, moral hazard occurs when one person takes more risks because someone else bears the cost of those risks. A moral hazard may occur where the actions of one party may change to the detriment of another after a financial transaction has taken place."
Maybe it is time for those who accept the risk to bear the burden?
I guess everyone in Florida should be looking at what is just off African coast right now. I have been watching it grow for about 2 days now.
Tropical Weather Outlook NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL 200 AM EDT Thu Aug 3 2017
For the North Atlantic...Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico:
1. A large area of showers and thunderstorms near the west coast of Africa is associated with a tropical wave. Environmental conditions are forecast to be conducive for gradual development, and a tropical depression could form by early next week over the tropical Atlantic Ocean. This system is forecast to move toward the west or west- northwest at 10 to 15 mph for the next several days. * Formation chance through 48 hours...low...20 percent. * Formation chance through 5 days...medium...50 percent.
There is a huge amount of water associated with this hurricane.
Prepare
As what will happen 90% of the time, it will get pulled to the north before making it to FL thanks to a upper level low to the northewst of FL. Dust in the upper levels and dry air aloft also is not a friend of tropical systems. I won't be losing any sleep.
Thanks again for illustrating how little difference there is between democrats and republicans
Frank had it been up to me it never would be an issue to begin with. The problem with these large government run programs whether it's flood insurance, SS, Obamacare or whatever is that once implemented they are very difficult to get rid of. People have made investments in business and homes in these areas with the understanding they will be able to get flood insurance backed by the government. You can't simply just cut people off, what I suggested would slowly ramp the program down in a way that is equitable for those that have made investments in those areas.
Developed property is not financeable without flood insurance.
Developed property that is not financeable is a tough sell and reflected in the market value.
That is exactly the point. If you can only collect on the insurance once I would suggest you have choice of either pocketing the check and selling the property for whatever you get for it, get insurance through a private company and/or take the risk.
Quote:
Why would anyone buy or lender finance a property that has incurred repeated federal flood loss claims?
You are not understanding the risk that is being priced. The risk that is being priced is the risk of coastal velocity flooding or areal flooding. It is not the risk of flash flooding, ponding, or sheeting except for a few rare cases of areal flooding inducing sheeting.
Then why is FEMA paying out on non-related claims?
I would really like an answer to that.
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.
