3 ms·
Rate of change limits, to combat this, are sane. Historically, the rate one paid was related to the risk one was insuring. The alternative is to have those wit
by nomel 3y ago
Rate of change limits, to combat this, are sane.
Historically, the rate one paid was related to the risk one was insuring. The alternative is to have those with low risk pay for those with high risk. I would prefer we don’t build I. Places that need to be rebuilt every few years, which you and I are paying for.
- baq 3y agoExactly my point. They can’t reduce their risk at current prices so either raise prices or stop offering products. If can’t raise prices, only the other option remains.
- mschuster91 3y ago> Historically, the rate one paid was related to the risk one was insuring. And that's still the case today. The rate of change regarding extreme weather events is significantly accelerating due to climate change and unintentional geoengineering [1], humans are ever more and more encroaching on nature, and a lot of infrastructure like power lines is frankly rotting, so it's only a matter of maths that insurers introduce serious rate hikes. Another part is that insurers try to anticipate future risk increases as well so they can build up reserves for when disaster (inevitably) strikes... and politicians all over the world aren't exactly prioritizing tackling climate change, quite a few openly deny it. So of course insurances have to price in the additional risk coming from the expectation of many more years of inaction making climate change and its impact even worse. [1] https://www.science.org/content/article/changing-clouds-unforeseen-test-geoengineering-fueling-record-ocean-warmth https://www.science.org/content/article/changing-clouds-unfo...