• JoeByeThen [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    3 months ago

    Me to my friends and family for like the past ten years: we really gotta get out of Florida before it's too late!

    Them: lol! We'll have waterfront property! glee

    • huf [he/him]
      ·
      3 months ago

      deregulating the "revenge on corporations" industry could work, actually...

  • FuckyWucky [none/use name]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Private insurance is such a scam. They can't guarantee shit. At least private banks regardless of how greedy they can be has state backing.

  • RION [she/her]
    ·
    2 months ago

    Given the direness of the situation, Keenan reluctantly supports Temple’s reforms, saying a truly free market would likely show it’s too risky to live in Louisiana. “We need to listen to what the market is telling us about the future,” he says. “You just might not like what it has to say.”

    It's kinda wild that a large subset of the state's population has to be financially ruined and the state's coffers drained by endless subsidies to insurance companies just to verify what science has been telling us would happen for quite a while now

    In a just universe we would have massive government programs to help resettle people out of places deemed unlivable due to runaway climate change

  • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I do actually think it’s bullshit that insurance companies are basically ever allowed to drop customers. Nah bro, you’re stuck with them.

    Insurance on homes should only change with a sale. If someone buys a house and you say you’ll insure it, you’re stuck insuring them until they move. No increasing prices, no dropping customers. You can certainly say “We’re not going to insure that home, don’t buy it.” but if you say you’ll insure a home that’s the end of it.

    Maybe, maybe, we can give them the option of paying out the full value of the policy to end it. Like, you can decide to act as if the home was fully destroyed and cut your losses if you really want to, and then that family can buy a new home somewhere else.

  • culpritus [any]
    ·
    2 months ago

    It's so surprising that creating an economic relation based on the concept of providing resiliency in the face of disasters for paying subscribers is having solvency issues because of increased disaster rates that have been predicted for decades. I recall someone writing about the tendency of the rate of profit to decline, and I think it might be especially relevant here.

    • nohaybanda [he/him]
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s really not what the tendency of the profit rate to decline is about. It’s based on an observation of the changing ratio of constant capital to variable capital (labour) as a given industry matures.

      Marx has written about ecology, though.

  • Assian_Candor [comrade/them]
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is the "free market" signaling it's time for managed retreat. Just how libs will morshupls explaining why the solution to climate change is not just "stop drilling for oil," actually, they will morshupls about what to do in this scenario other than the obvious course which is pay to move these people.

  • Skeleton_Erisma [they/them, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Imagine a reactionary boomer losing their home in a climate induced storm followed by insurance declining their claim.

    I would simply tell them to sell their house and move!

    What? Don't like the taste of your own medicine? Next time try not being a hurtful crank...