←back to thread

Is the world becoming uninsurable?

(charleshughsmith.substack.com)
478 points spking | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.448s | source
Show context
tobyhinloopen ◴[] No.42734903[source]
American, living in area prone to natural disasters: "Is the WHOLE WORLD becoming uninsurable?"

The answer is obviously "no" since there are other parts of the world that don't live on a hurricane highway nor build houses made from firewood in an area prone to wildfires.

replies(22): >>42735049 #>>42735252 #>>42735436 #>>42736011 #>>42736604 #>>42736730 #>>42737082 #>>42737199 #>>42737348 #>>42737687 #>>42738099 #>>42738455 #>>42738961 #>>42740444 #>>42740756 #>>42741668 #>>42741813 #>>42742051 #>>42742463 #>>42743561 #>>42744077 #>>42744352 #
chillfox ◴[] No.42737687[source]
It’s possible that solve the hurricane problems with proper building regulations and lower the risk of huge wildfires with controlled burning. But the US as always prefers to pretend that there’s nothing to be done when other parts of the world has figured it out.

We have cyclones here similar to the hurricanes in the US and usually it just blows over some trees maybe causes a power outage. The absolute worst I have experienced was 3 days without power. I have never seen a house destroyed by a cyclone here.

As for wildfires, they do unfortunately claim a few houses most years.

replies(8): >>42737747 #>>42737851 #>>42737935 #>>42737964 #>>42737978 #>>42740500 #>>42742010 #>>42742657 #
horsawlarway ◴[] No.42737851[source]
Hurricanes are mostly just flood damage in the US, and some wind/debris damage exactly like the blown over trees you mention.

Houses generally aren't destroyed by hurricanes in the sense of "the storm literally ripped them up", they're made uninhabitable by storm surges (flood).

The scary ones are tornados.

And tornados do genuinely fuck shit up. Even in those "enlightened" parts of the world you think have proper building regulations. If you're interested, go look at the recaps of tornado damage where they hit Europe here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_tornadoes_and...

Note the number of homes destroyed and people killed - plenty of both, even in those countries that prefer brick/concrete homes.

Hurricanes throw branches. Tornados throw cars.

replies(9): >>42738883 #>>42738892 #>>42739102 #>>42740019 #>>42740945 #>>42741239 #>>42743381 #>>42743704 #>>42744445 #
blharr ◴[] No.42738883[source]
Tornados might be more intense but only for a short period of time and in a small area. I don't see any of those where the tornado is lasting days, causing sustained damage. There are some where there are multiple tornadoes in a span, but each individual tornado is itself quick and violent but localized within a mile or so at most.

Compare some incidents with, Hurricane Sandy, for example, where it traveled across the span of a thousand miles and lasted a week of damages.

replies(2): >>42739218 #>>42739963 #
1. bee_rider ◴[] No.42739963[source]
Yes.

Tornadoes seem like a phenomenon for which insurance is actually a pretty good part of the solution. I mean, it is very unlikely for anything in particular to get hit by a tornado, but it is really devastating. It might take an unreasonable amount of work to build everything to the level where it can sustain a direct hit by a tornado. The expected value of tornado damage is quite low overall, we just need to deal with the individual catastrophes that occur.

Hurricanes… I mean, there are different sized hurricanes in different areas. For the ones that hit Florida, part of the solution is probably legitimately that we should have fewer people living there, because there’s going to be a widespread devastation there occasionally. And if you live in a hurricane-prone area, you are going to get hit by one eventually. (So like what’s the bet here? The insurance company knows they’ll probably have to pay out eventually).

Just to put a number to it, 2024 was apparently an unusually busy year for tornadoes, around $6B. That isn’t nothing! But one single hurricane cost $7B in 2024… and there was a $34B one… and a $79B one… who’s insuring the southern coast of the US? Seems rough.

replies(1): >>42743299 #
2. SJC_Hacker ◴[] No.42743299[source]
You can build houses which are much less likely to be seriously damaged in a hurricane. Some more ambitious designs are virtually hurricane proof. You never see high rises knocked over by a hurricane, for instance. Because they are (mostly) built correctly. Otherwise downtown areas in the entire Gulf Coast, Mid-Altantic, would simply not have existed for more than a few decades.

The same goes for floods. Most of the problem with floods, is that the house frame and flooring are made of wood. And wood rots. If you live in a flood prone area, the first floor at least, should be brick or stone for just about everything. Yes its expensive. But so is is $800/month flood insurance. Or having the federal government bail you out and passing the cost on to the taxpayer

But building things correctly is more expensive, and Americans love their cheap McMansions.

Also, on an individual level there is less incentive to build correctly, because you will almost certainly not get a discount on insurance. 99% of the population is at the whim of either buying a used house, or whatever the builder's models are for new construction. Its really only possible if you are very wealthy and build your own house on your own plot.