I’m not sure why you’re being down voted because you’re right… maybe its just that bit at the end of your reply.
FTA, large insurance companies are required to insure risky homes if they want to do business in the state at all. Since they can’t use catastrophe models or reinsurance they have to spread the risk over every home they insure in the state. So, people living in risky areas are having the cost of insurance subsidized by people living in less risky areas.
This creates perverse intensives. Peeps are just going to rebuild in areas with high fire risk… right? Want a big mansion in the woods? No problem! We can just rebuild if it catches on fire! Paid for by the public!
I don’t know what the answer is, but the insurance companies just aren’t at fault on this one. If you take issue with the increased rates, your problem is with climate change, and a housing system that requires insurance to function (houses are so expensive that we pay with mortgages, which require insurance).
I’m not sure why you’re being down voted because you’re right… maybe its just that bit at the end of your reply.
FTA, large insurance companies are required to insure risky homes if they want to do business in the state at all. Since they can’t use catastrophe models or reinsurance they have to spread the risk over every home they insure in the state. So, people living in risky areas are having the cost of insurance subsidized by people living in less risky areas.
This creates perverse intensives. Peeps are just going to rebuild in areas with high fire risk… right? Want a big mansion in the woods? No problem! We can just rebuild if it catches on fire! Paid for by the public!
I don’t know what the answer is, but the insurance companies just aren’t at fault on this one. If you take issue with the increased rates, your problem is with climate change, and a housing system that requires insurance to function (houses are so expensive that we pay with mortgages, which require insurance).
Lloyd should move.