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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Gun Violence Costs U.S. Health Care System, Taxpayers Billions Each Year [View all]hack89
(39,181 posts)6. Except all tax payers subsidize Federal flood insurance
The program was originally intended to pay for itself, but since Hurricane Katrina, its been heavily in debt. As of March 2011, the NFIP owes $17.8 billion, and Irene will only add to the costs, particularly as New York and New Jersey have heavy concentrations of federal flood protection. The NFIPs fiscal troubles have prompted the Government Accountability Office to put the program on its high risk list, urging reforms to help balance its budget and limit taxpayers exposure. Such concerns have motivated fiscal hawks like Taxpayers for Common Sense and the Heartland Institute to go as far as calling for an end to the federal program, which is up for renewal Sept. 30. On the other side of the issue, the National Association of Realtors has lobbied hard for more funding, arguing that its vital for development and home ownership.
But the argument over spending and debt obscures a larger concern: Why are we subsidizing the building of homes in flood-prone areas?
A significant chunk of flood insurance is offered at federally subsidized rates in areas vulnerable to natural catastrophes. A quarter of participants pay below full-risk rates, many of whom receive a subsidized or grandfathered premium, according to the GAO. As a result, more Americans have moved into low-lying, flood-prone areas since the creation of the NFIP. And the taxpayers have had to cover the risks, which often means additional aid to disaster-struck areas.
It would be possible to continue the program without continuing the subsidy: In March, the GAO suggested various changes to the program to put it on better footing. One of them was charging premium rates that fully reflect risks. This would probably mean insurance rate hikes. But it might also mean fewer people moving into flood-prone areas, and less taxpayer support for those who do.
But the argument over spending and debt obscures a larger concern: Why are we subsidizing the building of homes in flood-prone areas?
A significant chunk of flood insurance is offered at federally subsidized rates in areas vulnerable to natural catastrophes. A quarter of participants pay below full-risk rates, many of whom receive a subsidized or grandfathered premium, according to the GAO. As a result, more Americans have moved into low-lying, flood-prone areas since the creation of the NFIP. And the taxpayers have had to cover the risks, which often means additional aid to disaster-struck areas.
It would be possible to continue the program without continuing the subsidy: In March, the GAO suggested various changes to the program to put it on better footing. One of them was charging premium rates that fully reflect risks. This would probably mean insurance rate hikes. But it might also mean fewer people moving into flood-prone areas, and less taxpayer support for those who do.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/should-we-subsidize-flood-prone-homes/2011/08/29/gIQApl5pnJ_blog.html
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
129 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Gun Violence Costs U.S. Health Care System, Taxpayers Billions Each Year [View all]
onehandle
Mar 2013
OP
No, you should take it as being the point. No insurance company is going to insure all the nut jobs
Hoyt
Mar 2013
#81
You don't have insurance that covers you if you shoot someone who doesn't deserve it.
Hoyt
Mar 2013
#86
We'll, you can be required to post a bond. Lots of ways to make gun cultists cover
Hoyt
Mar 2013
#90
It is an umbrella liability policy from the company I get all my insurance from.
hack89
Mar 2013
#125
Sounds like car or homeowners and not what I'm talking about. If it doesn't cover at the limits
freshwest
Mar 2013
#126
And how much of your premium goes to fund the medical costs of gun violence Americans pay for?
baldguy
Mar 2013
#104
But it won't work the way you want if insurance companies treat gun owners like other customers
hack89
Mar 2013
#75
There are significant Federal taxes on guns and ammo - it goes to environmental projects
hack89
Mar 2013
#16
I am constantly surprised how little many gun controllers know about our present gun laws.
hack89
Mar 2013
#27
I am asking you for a dollar figure for what you mean by "significant" and you resort to insults.
SunSeeker
Mar 2013
#33
No, I asked "How much, in actual dollar figures, do these "significant" taxes bring in?"
SunSeeker
Mar 2013
#43
You said, "There are significant Federal taxes on guns and ammo - it goes to environmental projects"
SunSeeker
Mar 2013
#53
Unless the criminals are going directly to the popgun factories and stealing them from there,
IveWornAHundredPants
Mar 2013
#76
No - a straw purchaser is a criminal too. And criminals do steal guns from homes.
hack89
Mar 2013
#77
Not some of the money, ALL of the money. Tax them enough to cover the costs to taxpayers. nt
SunSeeker
Mar 2013
#24
If you can get it though Congress and the Supreme court then I will willingly pay. nt
hack89
Mar 2013
#38
How many decades have repukes been expecting Scalia and his buds to overturn Roe v Wade?
hack89
Mar 2013
#42
I see you never miss an opportunity for an insult, even when your insult makes no sense.
SunSeeker
Mar 2013
#54
The point being that the composition of the court is no indication of what they will do.
hack89
Mar 2013
#57
Such small prices to pay for the joy, liberty, and freedom to pack heat and be able to blow others
indepat
Mar 2013
#59
If we're willing to confront the effect of bad diets, lack of exercise, smoking...
CBHagman
Mar 2013
#70