←back to thread

Is the world becoming uninsurable?

(charleshughsmith.substack.com)
478 points spking | 7 comments | 17 Jan 25 00:32 UTC | HN request time: 0.244s | source | bottom
Show context
bluedevil2k ◴[17 Jan 25 01:50 UTC] No.42733208[source]▶
Like we see in California, when the government sets a price ceiling, insurance companies just leave. Same in Florida. If the free market truly was allowed run normally, the insurance rates in Pacific Palisades or on the Florida coast would be so high that no one could afford to live there. Is that a bad thing? If someone was living in a house near where they tested missiles, we'd call them crazy. At what point can we say the same about people building and rebuilding over and over in these disaster areas.
replies(20): >>42733219 #>>42733293 #>>42733338 #>>42733367 #>>42733486 #>>42733536 #>>42733984 #>>42734013 #>>42734047 #>>42734060 #>>42734202 #>>42734459 #>>42734714 #>>42734874 #>>42739590 #>>42740487 #>>42741749 #>>42742138 #>>42743881 #>>42744799 #
1. jmclnx ◴[17 Jan 25 02:41 UTC] No.42733536[source]▶
>Like we see in California, when the government sets a price ceiling, insurance companies just leave

Does not answer the question. With no price caps, no one will be able to buy insurance even if required by law. So that means if you own a house in a risky area, you will be unable to sell it and your values will fall. The price caps are to prevent that. But to me, there should be big incentives to prevent building and re-building in risky areas.

So yes, the world in some areas are uninsurable. And other areas are becoming uninsurable.

replies(4): >>42734393 #>>42734781 #>>42738537 #>>42739326 #
2. gunian ◴[17 Jan 25 05:30 UTC] No.42734393[source]▶
Tangential but I have read about propaganda and social engineering but seeing human caused fires to control migration patterns is a level of diabolical I never thought I would live to see but can't blame them if the cheap rent and house prices don't do the job gotta do what you gotta do
3. Panzer04 ◴[17 Jan 25 06:47 UTC] No.42734781[source]▶
Why is the burden on insurance companies to make up for individual poor decisions?

In some cases it makes sense to socialise the losses, but I'm not convinced this is one of them.

replies(1): >>42739313 #
4. jobs_throwaway ◴[17 Jan 25 15:29 UTC] No.42738537[source]▶
> With no price caps, no one will be able to buy insurance even if required by law

I very strongly doubt that say Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos wouldn't be able to afford market-rate insurance costs. They would just choose not to because its too expensive. Which is the point of letting the market set the rate

5. jmclnx ◴[17 Jan 25 16:08 UTC] No.42739313[source]▶
Insurance Companies do need to make a profit and Local, State and Fed Gov is allowing building in very risky areas. Just look at Florida, that is a very risky area for weather and sea rise.

So in reality the burden is falling on Insurance Companies. High rates will in a way prevent building in those areas.

replies(1): >>42744963 #
6. gordian-mind ◴[17 Jan 25 16:08 UTC] No.42739326[source]▶
"With no price caps, no one will be able to buy insurance even if required by law."

Burden of proof?

7. desmosxxx ◴[18 Jan 25 01:30 UTC] No.42744963{3}[source]▶
> High rates will in a way prevent building in those areas.

good?