Sandy Relief

Political discussions
User avatar
Gil Dobie
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 31515
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:45 pm
I am a fan of: Norse Dakota State
Location: Historic Leduc Estate

Re: Sandy Relief

Post by Gil Dobie »

Didn't see anything about relief for a Sandy Vagina
Image
User avatar
TheDancinMonarch
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 4779
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:23 pm
I am a fan of: Old Dominion
Location: Norfolk VA

Re: Sandy Relief

Post by TheDancinMonarch »

89Hen wrote:
TheDancinMonarch wrote:You should have to bear the full cost of insurance to protect your property as opposed to the give-away government flood insurance.

I live in an area of Norfolk that has never flooded but I have flood insurance as the harbor is but a few blocks away. It's not that expensive bcause of the history. But I know people with homes on the ocean on the Outer Banks with government flood insurance and their premiums are less than mine and they have the ocean in their front yard. And they don't even thank me or anyone else for our subsidy.
I don't think you are an expert on FEMA flood insurance.
I don't claim to be a FEMA flood insurance expert. I just say this as simply as possible. If you live by the ocean, with all the pleasures of that, and the ocean comes to claim your home, then you will have my condolences. But don't expect to get into my wallet so you can affect repairs.
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 36392
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: Sandy Relief

Post by BDKJMU »

89Hen wrote:
GannonFan wrote:There's plenty of places around here that qualified for disaster relief and they tend to be very low lying, in some cases even butting right up to waterways that are prone to flooding even in regular storms (to answer the criticism that this was a once in a lifetime event - rather, for many of these areas, these events happen at least annually). Why do we keep building or keep allowing people to build right up against a large river that will flood, and then subsidize the insurance for them to live there. There is a big difference between the Jersey shore and the guy building a house on a flood plain 50 miles from the shore right next to a big creek. Of course the former should be something that is protected and subsidized - as you say, millions of people use it. But that guy building his home next to a disaster doesn't tend to get much in the way of tourism, except when the FEMA guy come out once a year to bail him out.
I don't know how much of your post is fact and how much is speculation. Flood insurance for a homeowner is capped at $250,000 and it's really expensive. I have the full $250,000 coverage, but I only have dwelling coverage (won't cover personal possessions damaged by flood) and I have the highest deductible allowed ($5000) and my premium is $2,051 this year. That's some shitty coverage for that much money and you can't shop around... it is what it is.
It may be really expensive for shi**y coverage, but the bottom line is the fed flood insurance program isn't bringing in enough in premiums to pay out claims. 18 billion in the hole before Sandy, add 9 billion to that with the supplemental Congress just passed. The taxpayers shouldn't have to subsidize this. Maybe you don't need to be paying any more, but a lot of people on/near do. Premiums should reflect risk. And if that means a lot of people & businesses near/on the water can't afford it, so be it.
JMU Football:
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
Post Reply