Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
9. 340$ a year for me.
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 04:20 PM
Jan 2013

Not in an official flood plane, but I judge my property to be within 500 year flood elevation, so I'm damn sure going to take the insurance.


Flood insurance was transferred to the Government some time back, because it is unworkable as a market, with people getting assistance through 'disaster zone' federal aid (which isn't the free ride it is made out to be in the press) periodically. As long as you have that relief valve, people opt out of the insurance, and the market cannot function. So it was nationalized.

Federal flood aid should have been restricted to, probably some income metric, so it could aid people who NEED it, and not people who could have afforded insurance, but declined to purchase it. I would be unsurprised to discover a link between the people who could afford the insurance, but didn't buy it, and people who develop land in the riskiest locations, with the most expensive home values to insure.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Flood program to run dry ...»Reply #9