4 ms·
Precisely. I was submitting from my iPad which is like typing with mittens. There are other examples. [0] I really want this problem solved, because it's preve
by hodgesrm 3y ago
Precisely. I was submitting from my iPad which is like typing with mittens. There are other examples. [0]
I really want this problem solved, because it's preventing us from managing forests in a way that's provably more sustainable than the current regime of putting everything out until there's a fire that destroys the entire forest ecosystem. It would be ironic if high insurance prices turned out to be the lever that restores a semblance of ecological balance. [1] Maybe there's a deal to implement sane forest management in exchange for reasonable insurance rates.
[0] https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/environment/playing-fire-feud-grows/ https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/environment/...
[1] https://apnews.com/article/paradise-camp-fire-california-home-insurance-178618d95de90f84f56748f85aa610df https://apnews.com/article/paradise-camp-fire-california-hom...
- CoffeeOnWrite 3y agoWould that be truly ironic, or logical? People make decisions on the margin, rising insurance rates seem a fairly humane way to incentivize people moving out of dry rural wooded locations. Folks that really don’t want to move can pay the elevated public backstop options or if their house is paid off, run the risk of total loss. The longer people wait to leave the worse off they will come out because their property values will go to zero. I’d be in favor of public funding to help people relocate. If we get through it all, recreation and tourism can bounce back with lightweight infrastructure that doesn’t need to be defended, and some better engineered permanent infrastructure. Am I way off base?