Perhaps the most interesting part of the article:

  • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    When your insurance drops your coverage, that’s your cue to GET THE FUCK OUT BEFORE YOU HAVE YET LOST EVERYTHING.

    Those actuarial tables are designed from the ground up and refined over literally decades (up to around a century in some cases) to predict risk and while they’re not always perfectly accurate they are clearly ENOUGH so that they have made it possible for insurers to remain profitable.

    IF THEY KNOW ANYTHING THAT YOU DON’T, THEY ARE DEFINITELY ACTING ON IT.

    I know you can’t literally just drop everything, or fit absolutely everything that matters to you in your car in a pinch, but you WILL be better off if you’ve packed up and prepped for transport as many as possible of the things that would hurt you and/or inconvenience you the most to leave behind.

    So for those of you who haven’t already experienced total loss, learn from this. Prepare yourselves. The people displaced by this will strain many other extant failure points in our society. Shit is about to get MUCH, MUCH WORSE.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 days ago

      Likewise there’s a reason all the billionaires are building bunkers in Hawaii and New Zealand and investing in yachts, that Greenland and northern Canada have new geopolitical and economic importance, and that the Panama Canal is at risk of not being able to get enough traffic across. I’m tired of getting gaslit by climate naysayers.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        19 hours ago

        “Everything is fine!” they say as they stockpile supplies and build secret locations to hide.

    • homura1650@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      The problem is that people cannot simply get out at scale. The homes themselves are not portable and represent a significant investment that most homeowners cannot afford to lose. An individual can sell, but that requires there being a buyer, so doesn’t actually solve the problem.

      What is needed here is a government funded relocation program. The government buys houses in eligible areas at market rate (locked in at the time the program starts, as market rate should collapse to 0). Then, the government does nothing, and saves money from not needing to subsidize the insurance market, and need needing to spend as much on disaster response and relief. Given that the disaster relief savings is largely born by the federal government, this program should receive federal funding as well.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        In the US, voters have shown over and over that they don’t care if a lot of people become homeless. Why would you expect them to care about people who become homeless because of fires than they do about people who become homeless because of economic conditions?

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        So someone has say 2 million in real estate and 1.5 million in other Investements. They are at risk of losing some of that 3.5M while still counting themselves wealthy and the government who can’t afford to provide a whole laundry list of shit for normal people just hands them a few million to ensure their bad decisions don’t cost them anything.

        How about we don’t subsidize your insurance and if you suck up you just lose your money.

      • jfrnz@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 day ago

        Why should my tax dollars be used to bail out someone who bought a multimillion dollar home in a high risk area? Why should home owners get all the profits from owning but get to skirt the risks?

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          That’s an easy one. Because the government let this happen by not reigning in the corporate pollution it knew was happenig. All so the economy would grow and grow which is what gave you the money to pay those taxes. So the tax dollars you are giving the gov are the reason these people need to move.

          • kipo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            14 hours ago

            I think relocation (and getting people comfortable with their tax dollars going towards it) would work better if the US states weren’t so ideologically divided.

            There is no way I want the average republican relocating to my state, let alone wanting to pay for such punishment.