The most recent moves seem to be relaxing the pricing rules to allow major disaster pricing and recharging reinsurance rates in exchange for insurers offering more policies in high risk areas.
> The Bulletin was issued pursuant to California Insurance Code section 675.1(b)(1), which states that an insurer “shall not cancel or refuse to renew a policy of residential property insurance for a property located in any zip code within or adjacent to the fire perimeter, for one year after the declaration of a state of emergency . . . based solely on the fact that the insured structure is located in an area in which a wildfire has occurred.”
Typical California redistribution...but this is from the bottom to the top.
Do you not understand that this is precisely how insurance works?
Of course insurance is about pooling risk. But subsidizing implies you’re doing it below market rates.
If I pay my market rate but still -EV insurance premium, I’m not subsidizing anyone. I’m just happy to pay for the convexity insurance provided.
If I have to pay 20% more than I otherwise would, because the insurance company can’t charge someone else 20% more, that is actual subsidization.
A subsidy distorts natural market forces. This is what I am talking about.
Don’t be so quick to be a dick.