My preferred solution would be to declare unlivable areas national parks and buy out the homeowners via eminent domain (at a quantity that lets them maintain a

My preferred solution would be to declare unlivable areas national parks and buy out the homeowners via eminent domain (at a quantity that lets them maintain a significant percentage of their home equity, since the home is no longer sellable). Regardless of climate change: punishing people for where they live is, historically, a great way to kick off a revolt or a civil war. People need to move out of storm zones, but the move needs to be executed mercifully or those who are forced to move will have little incentive to consider themselves members of society (to everyone's detriment). My real point commenting initially though was that this situation is an excellent example of the failures of raw capitalism. Raw capitalism is a system perfectly willing to allow, admit, and increase inequality of outcome based on deviation from initial conditions. In contrast, societies only work long-term if there are some guardrails on inequality of outcome (otherwise, what is the point of cooperation?). If ten or a hundred thousand people are at risk of losing half their net worth, that's the kind of thing a functioning society should probably step in on to lower the burden.