3 ms·

Calling it crony capitalism is kind of silly. Do you expect the US to just abandon vast swaths of the country that are at risk of natural disasters? No homes

by refurb 4y ago

Calling it crony capitalism is kind of silly. Do you expect the US to just abandon vast swaths of the country that are at risk of natural disasters? No homes along the Gulf coast, no homes in tornado alley, no homes along the earthquake faults along the West coast?

kasey_junk 4y ago
There is no equivalent to NFIP for tornado or earth quake insurance. We leave that to private insurers (and sometimes the states have programs). That is one of the biggest arguments against the NFIP. It’s a specific subsidy that benefits some areas more than others (it’s also a deeply regressive policy).
- refurb 4y ago
  If an massive earthquake levels SF the government will most certainly come in and rescue homeowners. So it’s either subsidy upfront or on the backend?
  - kasey_junk 4y ago
    They didn’t in 1989. The relief bill was entirely for repairing damaged infrastructure. FEMA specifically mentions that you can’t expect replacement housing costs to be paid in many of their documents: https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-fema-disaster-assistance-may-31 https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-f...
    - refurb 4y ago
      ‘89 saw minimal damage save for a few neighborhoods like the Marina. If SF sees 50% of houses uninhabitable and 12% have earthquake insurance you think the govt will shrug and say “too bad”?
      - kasey_junk 4y ago
        In 2020 the house passed a supplemental bill to enable funds that can go to home replacement for Puerto Rican earthquake victims because the existing law doesn’t allow it. The Senate never passed it and the President promised to veto it. I have no crystal ball to know what might happen in the future but right now there is no earthquake equivalent to national flood insurance and recent history suggests the federal government doesn’t have the appetite to add it.
scarface74 4y ago
Yes
chiefalchemist 4y ago
I didn't say this instance was Crony Capitalism per se. It's the idea that Uncle Sam gets too deep into too many things and yet the masses of voters believe we have free markets, Capitalism, etc. What I expect is less insanity. Sure, help the people that were there. But for others to be coming in from the outside and exploiting the gov's offers, that's hardly reasonable and smart. Furthermore, it's hypocritical - and costly - for the gov to say "climate change is coming it's going to raise the oceans..." and then in the next breath "here's taxpayer money to rebuild in a low-lying area because this isn't going to happen again." If we want people to take climate change seriously, then mixed signals like this aren't helping.

by refurb 4y ago

kasey_junk 4y ago

There is no equivalent to NFIP for tornado or earth quake insurance. We leave that to private insurers (and sometimes the states have programs). That is one of the biggest arguments against the NFIP. It’s a specific subsidy that benefits some areas more than others (it’s also a deeply regressive policy).

refurb 4y ago
If an massive earthquake levels SF the government will most certainly come in and rescue homeowners. So it’s either subsidy upfront or on the backend?
- kasey_junk 4y ago
  They didn’t in 1989. The relief bill was entirely for repairing damaged infrastructure. FEMA specifically mentions that you can’t expect replacement housing costs to be paid in many of their documents: https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-fema-disaster-assistance-may-31 https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/earthquake-survivors-apply-f...
  - refurb 4y ago
    ‘89 saw minimal damage save for a few neighborhoods like the Marina. If SF sees 50% of houses uninhabitable and 12% have earthquake insurance you think the govt will shrug and say “too bad”?
    - kasey_junk 4y ago
      In 2020 the house passed a supplemental bill to enable funds that can go to home replacement for Puerto Rican earthquake victims because the existing law doesn’t allow it. The Senate never passed it and the President promised to veto it. I have no crystal ball to know what might happen in the future but right now there is no earthquake equivalent to national flood insurance and recent history suggests the federal government doesn’t have the appetite to add it.

scarface74 4y ago

Yes

chiefalchemist 4y ago

I didn't say this instance was Crony Capitalism per se. It's the idea that Uncle Sam gets too deep into too many things and yet the masses of voters believe we have free markets, Capitalism, etc. What I expect is less insanity. Sure, help the people that were there. But for others to be coming in from the outside and exploiting the gov's offers, that's hardly reasonable and smart. Furthermore, it's hypocritical - and costly - for the gov to say "climate change is coming it's going to raise the oceans..." and then in the next breath "here's taxpayer money to rebuild in a low-lying area because this isn't going to happen again." If we want people to take climate change seriously, then mixed signals like this aren't helping.