If insurers are refusing to cover disasters, then mortgage lenders should be unable to force buyers to buy (useless) insurance
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
144 points (98.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5086 readers
872 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silly cat, that's not how big business collusion and corruption work. mortage lenders will continue to force prospective homeowners to cover and maintain insurance on their properties even if it causes them to default on their payments, then they'll sell the homes again to flippers or multinationals.
Ah I see. Sounds like big business collusion should be hunted to extinction.
And bankrupt and dispossess the lender if a disaster happens to their newly acquired home?
mortgage lenders are going to have to do something. Like require natural disaster be part of the policy. Otherwise they will have people walking away from mortgages after disasters.
then they would lose income, not going to happen. let's be honest, premiums will go up and coverage will go down.
Paying for insurance in places like Florida is going to essentially equate to throwing money straight into a fire.
The thing about insurance is that when it's properly regulated, they're able to pay the claims (and actually do so)
Toss out the regulation, and insurance becomes worthless.
Humans just don't comprehend large sums of money. Taxation created the Interstate Highway system, it sent us to the moon. The masses giving relatively small amounts of money can and does move mountains.
But instead of empowering elected representatives (that we can vote out) to do insurance, we instead farm it out to for-profit insurance companies and, inevitably, attorneys. THIS IS TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.
We mandate that everyone buy automobile insurance (the masses thereby being taxed) and then when all that money floods in, capitalism is beholden to keep as much of it as possible, so the insurers start fucking the insured with "claims adjustments." Enter the attorneys, who smell the size of the payroll because that's what attorneys do - and they sue the dogshit out of the insurers to get a piece of the action, ostensibly because they just care so much.
Think about how much money is wasted throughout this process due to incompetence, corporate greed and filthy lawyers. When you watch ad-supported television (if you do) think about what percentage of the commercials are for attorneys that exclusively sue insurers. Imagine how much money those commercials represent. Now realize that both the insurers and the attorneys make money hand over fist despite the inefficiency of this deeply stupid dance.
But government isn't the answer to the problem, amirite?
I was really hoping no fault became the norm.
But something something socialism something government overreach something something!
I was thinking about this earlier this week, in a sense. Not quite insurance but throwing away money.
The federal government is going to be providing aid and assistance during and after the hurricane, and I couldn't help but think about how the more mild, less disaster-prone parts of the country are effectively subsidizing people to continue to move to Florida, despite how unlivable it really is. As Florida grows more the rest of the country has to pay too, it doesn't just affect Floridians