[Rhodes22-list] Coastal Living - Insurance

[Brad Haslett]

Herb,

The Supreme Court ruled last Wednesday that they won't hear the two biggest
flood cases in NOLA, one involving Xavier University over flood v wind
damage.  New Orleans flooded, period.  If you bought flood insurance (only
the federal government sells it) you're covered.  If you didn't you're, uh,
pretty silly considering your elevation. Mississippi gets a little trickier
because if you have nothing but a slab you probably are a victim of the
storm surge - if your house is still on the foundation, perhaps not.
Florida circa 2004 (four hurricanes) is pretty straight forward - wind. No
insurance company to my knowledge has "slipped town" in the middle of the
night and refused their obligations.  Many of the big ones, however, have
re-assessed their exposure and either raised their rates or refused to write
new policies.  Where states have imposed rate increase limits (Florida) they
simply balked and pulled-out. My boat insurance is about half what it would
be if it were based on a coast.  If we make this a "we're all in this
together" issue, I'll be subsidizing those in a higher risk category.  How
much more simple can this be?  Some day when I'm rich and famous and live on
a coast, I promise to accept it was a voluntary choice and not ask my less
fortunate brethren inland to help defray the costs of my lifestyle choice.

The health care insurance is a bit more difficult but not that difficult.
If you take a bit of my plan (no kid ever died of a runny nose), and parts
of Roberts plan (public immunization and preventative care), and part of
Kennedy's (jeeze, did I just say that?) health savings plan and tax rebates,
you get a workable solution.  On the other hand, if we insist on following
the "we're all God's children and DESERVE equal coverage" we're headed for
disaster.  I think the right to vote should be based on everyone being
forced to run three hot dog stands for a month and having to hire two
employees.  If you think finding good help is difficult now, wait until
health care is "free".  Employers who provide health care insurance do so
because it makes  economic sense to attract good employees and keep them
healthy.  Take away that incentive for both employers and employees you get
one step closer to Cuba.

Brad

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
wrote:

> Sorry, I missed that implication (though I don't see how anyone would
> have got that). I'm not sure what you mean "require before they leave".
> What does "leaving" have to do with anything. Yes, they should be
> required to pay. They should be allowed to "leave" regardless, of
> whether they stay or go.
>
> I don't know of any court challenges where insurance companies are
> asking to be relieved of their obligations; however, I know of MANY
> where insurance companies are saying they weren't covering what is being
> claimed. That's normal.
>
> Maybe there are cases I'm not aware of, but I agree with your basic
> concept, but I'm still confused by what you mean "leaving". A company
> should be allowed to shut down business, and cease operation in that
> city/state/whatever. However, if the company still exists, "leaving"
> that area does not, and should not, relieve them of responsibility.
>
> Most of the claims I'm familiar with in the Katrian stricken areas have
> to do with weather or not the floods were "rising water" damages (which
> are typically not covered by regular home-owners insurance) or storm
> caused. I see valid arguments both ways,and unfortunately, that's
> something the courts WILL have to decide. The toehr big claims are for
> incidental damages, which are, for the most part, scams by the lawyers.
>
> john Belanger wrote:
> > i was implying that the company was refusing to pay on claims before
> they left. if they don't want to offer future policies in a state, that
> their right. the state should not impede their business. but the government
> should require that the claims be paid before the company leaves. if that's
> the law. it should not be susceptible to court challenges, delays, etc.
> >
> > Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:  Actually John, you said a
> LOT more than that. The "'tole ya!" was based
> > more on this:
> >
> > "i fault the state and federal governments in allowing them to leave a
> > state (especially after a large insurance loss)."
> >
> > Any company that experiences a "loss" in a given area should be able to
> > choose to leave that area, if they want. The feds should not dictate to
> > states how they run their state. They certainly should not be forcing
> > private business to over services at a loss. Guess who gets to make up
> > the difference in that loss?
> >
> >
> >
> > john Belanger wrote:
> >
> >> herb,
> >> i said the feds action should be to remove caps so that those who can
> pay what is required would still be able to get coverage. if the rate is too
> high for some folks, then the pool shrinks. equalibrium returns. the
> companies send their sales staffs into areas of risk, determine what the
> risk is worth, and sell you a policy. if what is covered occurs, then you
> should get what you paid for. insurance. whats wrong with requiring a
> company to honor its commitments? and there are lots of people who are smart
> enough not to own land on the edge of the water, but who vacation every year
> at the edge of the water.
> >>
> >> Herb Parsons wrote:
> >> Brad - Tole ya!
> >>
> >> john Belanger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> insurance companies are in the business of making money. they hedge
> their bets like any good bookie would. the one thing to remember about them
> is that they are also known by their other important title: institutional
> investor. i fault the state and federal governments in allowing them to
> leave a state (especially after a large insurance loss). they are national
> companies, and should be allowed and required as such to offer coverage
> nationally. take off any cap on fees for catastrophic event coverage. if
> people are willing to pay, insurance companies should be allowed to charge
> whatever the traffic will bear. in return, everyone should be covered for
> minimal coverage.
> >>>
> >>> Brad Haslett wrote:
> >>> This was predictable. The Sun-Herald (Biloxi-Gulfport) had an article
> today
> >>> about State Farm insurance and the fact they aren't writing any more
> >>> homeowners policies in Florida. Nationwide and Allstate came to the
> same
> >>> conclusion earlier (boat insurance is sure to follow). Now I
> understand it
> >>> is hard to love an insurance company, but this is a perfect example of
> what
> >>> happens when 'da gubment' sticks its nose in private business, you
> don't get
> >>> cheaper prices, you get fewer services. Both Mississippi and Florida
> (and
> >>> other states) have gone after insurers through their state insurance
> >>> commissions and Attorney Generals, and the net result has been for the
> >>> insurance companies to pick-up their bat, and ball, and glove, and go
> >>> somewhere else to play. Those of us who live inland pay as well - my
> >>> earthquake coverage was canceled due to Katrina, huh? It sounds silly
> but
> >>> that's the way it works. The 2004/05 hurricane season gave the big
> boys
> >>> bloody noses so they reduce their risk somewhere else to limit their
> >>> exposure. Now here is the next thing that's predictable as hell,
> politicians
> >>> will line-up during an election season and spout how they're going to
> >>> protect you from those "greedy" insurance companies. BS. This is
> reality
> >>> and the only thing you can do to remedy the situation is to take on
> more
> >>> risk yourself, or move. If you love FEMA, you'll really love universal
> >>> health care.
> >>>
> >>> Brad
> >>> __________________________________________________
> >>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------
> >>> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
> >>> __________________________________________________
> >>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Herb Parsons
> S/V O'Jure - O'Day 25
> S/V Reve de Pappa - Coronado 35
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>