• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 days ago

    Well, some of the locations involved have simply become uninsurable. What do you expect that the insurance companies do? Pay for a brand new home every other year, just because it was burned down or blown away in a storm again? No commercial insurance ever could afford this.

    Just like US health insurance, where the private companies don’t take people with prior issues or handicaps. If you want them to be insured, you need a nationwide, mandatory insurance to spread the risk among many.

    And even with a nationalized insurance coverage, some people might be forced to pay more than others, for unsuitable home locations with home insurances or unhealthy behavior (alcohol, tobacco, or drug use) with health insurance.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      some of the locations involved have simply become uninsurable. What do you expect that the insurance companies do

      In an ideal world, I’d like to see them use their power, influence and bankroll to push forward greater action to combat climate change.

      Surely there is an “enlightnend self-interest” arguement to be made for them funding action that will reduce future claims payouts?

      Similar to insurers funding fire prevention activities, improvements in building codes, additional safety features in road design, etc.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        That does not help as long as idiots build wooden sheds as “houses” right on the middle of woods that are known to burn down every few years. Common sense is rather rare with some people, and you cannot expect other people to pay for it via their insurance.