3 ms·
> it is not super attractive to start subsidizing people who choose to live in increasingly disastrous zones At the risk of taking this down a political path,
by jghn 3y ago
> it is not super attractive to start subsidizing people who choose to live in increasingly disastrous zones
At the risk of taking this down a political path, I'll take this a step further. States like FL who fall into this bucket are further aggravating as they are also the ones that espouse personal responsibility & small government.
I'm not personally against subsidizing these things. But I am against people screaming until they're blue in the face that they hate socialism and then cry foul when their insurance rates are too expensive for them to afford.
- pc86 3y agoWhat does a small government ideology have to do with a private insurance company making a business decision? You're injecting politics because you don't like the politics of Florida as you see them, which is fine, but it doesn't really fit here.
- jghn 3y agoWhen their insurance rates get to be unaffordable and/or their homes are destroyed without insurance the complaints tend to shift to being that the government should do something to help them out of the predicament. I'm 100% fine with an individual choosing to not pay going insurance rates and choosing to live in a risky environment. I'm also 100% fine with that person eschewing the idea that government should be subsidizing anything. I'm 0% fine with such people coming back and complaining that the leopards ate their face.