4 ms·
There are more options than “the current bad system” and “shut it down violently”. The FEMA insurance program can be modified so payouts have a lifetime cap, an
by orev 7y ago
There are more options than “the current bad system” and “shut it down violently”. The FEMA insurance program can be modified so payouts have a lifetime cap, and/or once they reach a certain level, a buyout is required. It would allow people to relocate and over the long term (i.e. a generation or two), the accounting works out.
As a society who has completely failed addressing climate change, having “all of us” help pay for it is not a completely unfair way to address it.
- sjwright 7y agoAreas with high risk of catastrophic natural disaster should be identified and FEMA insurance should not be given to any new residents or new dwellings in these areas.
- Consultant32452 7y agoOnce you include tornadoes in the flat places, drought in the farm places, hurricanes on the coast places, and earthquakes in the earthquake places there really not much places left.
- sjwright 7y agoGovernment bureaucracy is absolutely the right kind of answer for things like earthquakes and other one-in-a-hundred-years events. But any time a location wouldn't be considered habitable but for the presence of FEMA, Government bureaucracy is the wrong answer.
- krainboltgreene 7y agoAlright, so who gets to relocate about a dozen major cities?
- gbrown 7y agoExactly