GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Lawmakers push insurance backstop for natural disasters

• 36047
  

  The same area SoCal has been affected by wild fires on more than one occasion (17 in the last 10 years). Why should fire fighter's lives be endangered and tax payer dollars wasted for people to stay in a hazardous area?

  Maybe Ill go build my house on a Volcano that erupts every 3 years or maybe a flood zone. Why should tax dollars be spent on people that build their homes under the sea? That's right New Orleans is built 12 feet below sea level.

  So where exactly is one, 100% safe from natural disasters? The fact is there is nowhere that is completely safe from natural disasters. However, if you are willing to live in an area that year after year experiences natural disasters you are at a minimum "living at your own expense". This choice to live in a hazardous area should be at the homeowners expense and not that of the U.S. taxpayer.

  Hurricane after Hurricane Wildfire after Wildfire, Earthquake etc..etc. When will people learn? And how many billions of dollars must we pay before they do?

  mike Posted October 28, 2007 12:00 AM
• 18107
  

  In my opinion the government should not insure anyone against anything. We have subsidized and insured farmers to such an extent that we have far too many farmers polluting far too much land. Let half of them go out of business and the rest will earn a passable income to remain on the farm. The same is true in so many areas it is ridiculous.

  The government has removed the right to fail. This has allowed money to be invested where it should not go and produced results far below normal for Americans. We are in steady decline going back to the new deal and have not been able to reverse or even hold steady the decline. Our economy is moving to China and India and we can do nothing to stop it. It is time our elected officials stop insuring everyone against every loss.

  Government should get back to government and stop trying to pay off all votes to stay in office. Hard to do when the voters are in it to gain as much in government payoffs as possible. We need some force that will change the attitude of the government and the governed from asking what the country can do for them (JFK).

  Taxpayer Posted August 7, 2006 7:01 AM
• 18063
  

  I live 62 miles inland from the Gulf Coast. I have homeowner's insurance, paid for out of my own pocket. My insurance company is dropping wind and hail coverage, and increasing my premiums because of the 2005 hurricanes. Flood insurance is NFIP (federal), now wind and hail will be through the state "wind pool" at a cost of more than $1,200 per year. Homeowner's for other hazards is also more than $1,000 per year. Two major insurance companies will not write new policies in our state since Katrina-Rita of 2005. If we can't get homeowner's insurance, we can't get mortgages. So do your research before you go pointing fingers. Most of us are paying for insurance out of our own pockets, but the insurance industry is trying to minimize its risk and increase profits at policyholder's expense. Why should I have an increased premium with reduced coverage? The only difference between "terrorism" (unexpected event) and "disaster" (unexpected event) is one is an act of man, the other is act of God. Why should one be federally insured and the other not? Insurance is to protect against the unexpected -- whatever the event may be.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 3, 2006 10:14 AM
• 18032
  

  Lord protect us from getting all the government we pay for.

  If you want to live on a tropical paradise in the main path of hurricanes, pay to insure against the inevitable out of your own pocket. If you want to live in tornado alley, pay for the insurance out of your own pocket. If you want to live on the edge of the San Andreas fault line, pay for the insurance out of your own pocket. If you want to live on the side of an active volcano, pay for the insurance out of your own pocket.

  If your house burns down, floods out, has a tree fall through its roof in a wind storm, or any other natural "disaster," I feel badly for you. But I don't want to bail you out of your own decision on where you want to live. I have homeowners insurance. You should too. If you can't afford it for where you want to live, then you can't afford to live there, or you should pay the "stupid tax" when you lose everything.

  Bemused in the South Posted August 2, 2006 9:12 AM