free market is just great

[tostaos]

Free market is just great. Let's look at Hurricane Sandy. The free market with little regulation lets us built right up to the beach of the ocean, even so only retards don't know that it's flood prone and at risk from storms. We don't want much federal government, the States should clean up their own mess and pay for the cleanup themselves. Let's get rid of FEMA and other agencies, let's send them home. Let's not have regulation that would prevent fuel shortages as we have now on the east coast. The free market will regulate all of that way better.

[chaard]

I'm no economist but what does the free market have to do with Hurricane Sandy?
Gas stations and grocery stores that have no power can't participate in the free market. People that have no homes or cars due to the destruction have little need for gasoline. Of course others that came out unscathed will need it but a large % don't. So demand is down as well as supply. People in high rises.are without electricity so why would they need refrigerated groceries.
Where the free market can't fulfill, charities and disaster response agencies fill the gap.
Free market is pretty much sidelined for now.

[tostaos]

The free unregulated market makes it possible that there is that much destruction. Regulations would make it possible to have a more reliable energy supply when disaster hits.

[DeltaT]

For a smart guy you have a twisted way of defining free market. You, apparently, believe that some "thing" out there, maybe called the government, can protect us from everything.

A free market allows you to work in what you want to work in, where you want to work and when you want to work. A government controlled market tells you what to do, where to do it and when to do it typically for very little money, incentive and for long hours.

Move to most any country where the government controls then come back. You'll be glad you live here. Not saying you should not complain about what needs complaining but should people living inland also not live there because their are earthquakes everyonce in a while. Can't live near the ocean front nor can we live inland. That doesn't leave anyplace to live seems to me.

[ga-hvac-tech]

Tos... please do not take this personally...

I see you are living in a country with a free market system... yet if I remember correctly (pleas correct me if I am wrong); you are not native born. My question:
If the free market system is soooo horrible... why are you here rather than in the country (probably with an over-bearing government) you were born in?

The beauty of Freedom is NOT measured in efficiency, rather in the lack of over-bearing govt destroying the quality of life one would have if they were free. Now that quality of life has NOTHING to do with efficiency or costs or profits or possessions... rather that quality of life is based on being able to make one's OWN decisions without someone forcing you (by law) to do things you do not want to do... or to spend your money in ways you do not choose to. That is why it is called freedom.

The other side of freedom is: When one is free to choose, they are also responsible for their choices. Plain and simple... Example:
*If I build a beach-house... I had better be able to afford insurance for what WILL happen sooner or later.
*In the case of prices: What is better: Govt regulated prices which are either a rip-off so some crony gets a monopoly... or maybe artificially low prices that guarantee shortages and low quality products? Or perhaps floating prices that sometimes are high, yet always come back down when the law of supply and demand kicks in?

Shortages usually are the result of govt intervention... NOT the market-place.

Freedom is something one must love enough to cherish... otherwise one will take it for granted and loose it.

[Gib's Son]

If Government regulation is so great and needed then why did they need to suspend so much regulation and red tape to expedite the rescue/clean up/ relief efforts? Answer: Even the Feds know their regulations are intentionally meant to be prohibitive and stand in the way of progress.

[Tool-Slinger]

Free market is just great. Let's look at Hurricane Sandy. The free market with little regulation lets us built right up to the beach of the ocean, even so only retards don't know that it's flood prone and at risk from storms. We don't want much federal government, the States should clean up their own mess and pay for the cleanup themselves. Let's get rid of FEMA and other agencies, let's send them home. Let's not have regulation that would prevent fuel shortages as we have now on the east coast. The free market will regulate all of that way better.


Oh my. Where to begin? I'll try:

The free market with little regulation lets us built right up to the beach of the ocean,


That has nothing to do with a free market. That is personal property rights.

only retards don't know that it's flood prone and at risk from storms.

I know, and people still build houses in flood plains anyway, freedom of choice does not always mean a wise decision.

We don't want much federal government, the States should clean up their own mess and pay for the cleanup themselves

Wrong, that is what FEMA and the national guard is for.

Let's not have regulation that would prevent fuel shortages as we have now on the east coast.

Regulation would HAVE NEVER been able to prevent the fuel shortages we have here in this situation, that is one of the most ignorant points I have heard posted in ARP in several months.

And if you do not like it here, feel free to return to whatever bannana republic from which you came.

[jtrammel]

Like others have said, if you don't like a free market then move to another country don't try to ruin mine!

[tostaos]

You, apparently, believe that some "thing" out there, maybe called the government, can protect us from everything. Not at all. I am just not for a free for all. Some regulation just can save a lot in the long run.

A free market allows you to work in what you want to work in, where you want to work and when you want to work. A government controlled market tells you what to do, where to do it and when to do it typically for very little money, incentive and for long hours.Where have you been, who is promoting government controlled markets today?

Move to most any country where the government controls then come back. You'll be glad you live here. Not saying you should not complain about what needs complaining but should people living inland also not live there because their are earthquakes everyonce in a while. Can't live near the ocean front nor can we live inland. That doesn't leave anyplace to live seems to me.
I did live in other places, you on the other hand probably not. Do you really believe we could not left a buffer zone of a half a mile for the community to enjoy on all the beaches? ...and you are right, it's completely stupid to build cities on top of known active earthquake faults.
The good news is, Darwinism is well and alive. In the long run the nature will clean up that DNA pool of idiots.

[tostaos]

If the free market system is soooo horrible... why are you here rather than in the country (probably with an over-bearing government) you were born in?
Ever heard anything about the thing called family? It's a hell lot more important to me than a friggen country... and no, government is a lot more over-bearing here in the States. I live in a County that is in total control of Republicans and living is way more restricted as were I come from. Around the world everybody has this impression of the total individual freedom in the States. I have news for you, that must have changed when the West was no more the wild west.

The other side of freedom is: When one is free to choose, they are also responsible for their choices. Plain and simple... Example:
*If I build a beach-house... I had better be able to afford insurance for what WILL happen sooner or later.
That is not what happens. Most always say that they want to rebuilt. Many don't have the insurance necessary. Every time we have a big storm the federal government has to come in and it costs a lot of money.
Government regulations should regulate the big things. The things that are important in the big picture. Not in the bedroom, my house, my body...

*In the case of prices: What is better: Govt regulated prices which are either a rip-off so some crony gets a monopoly... or maybe artificially low prices that guarantee shortages and low quality products? Or perhaps floating prices that sometimes are high, yet always come back down when the law of supply and demand kicks in?

Shortages usually are the result of govt intervention... NOT the market-place.
I think you don't understand what I mean. Energy is supplied by monopolies or very small markets. With dominance in the market comes also the responsibility to supply the market and regulations can help to accomplish that as there are no incentives for the free market to do it on their own as it only costs them money. Like a hardened electric supply. Fuel supply that is not affected by floods...

[tostaos]

The free market with little regulation lets us built right up to the beach of the ocean,

That has nothing to do with a free market. That is personal property rights.
Yes it does. Property rights is an integrated part of the free market. In other places it's more regulated what you can do with the property. Not by much, as there are many regulation on local levels what can be built on a piece of land.


only retards don't know that it's flood prone and at risk from storms.

I know, and people still build houses in flood plains anyway, freedom of choice does not always mean a wise decision.
That's all you have? or all the smarties who live right on the ocean and want to ride out the storm and then need to be rescued. I don't know any other country that does not enforce mandatory evacuation...and goes and rescues them after they get in trouble.


We don't want much federal government, the States should clean up their own mess and pay for the cleanup themselves

Wrong, that is what FEMA and the national guard is for.
Let's change that.
I thought all you Republicans are for more power to the States. I am for it. Pay for the messes you create yourselves.


Let's not have regulation that would prevent fuel shortages as we have now on the east coast.

Regulation would HAVE NEVER been able to prevent the fuel shortages we have here in this situation, that is one of the most ignorant points I have heard posted in ARP in several months. Regulations could definitely improve supply reliability. Like minimal storage requirements, ability to pump without working electric grid, above flood level.
There are already regulations. My point to all of you is, that regulations can be good.


And if you do not like it here, feel free to return to whatever bannana republic from which you came.
1. learn to spell banana
2. it's the typical respond I get when somebody has no good arguments

[tostaos]

Like others have said, if you don't like a free market then move to another country don't try to ruin mine!I like free regulated market as the quality of live overall is better.
My son, born in Kansas did go back to my home country to study for a semester. He already talks to go back for graduate school and who knows, he will like it better over there. There are quite many Americans with means who live abroad. Why do you think that is?

[Tool-Slinger]

Yes it does. Property rights is an integrated part of the free market. In other places it's more regulated what you can do with the property. Not by much, as there are many regulation on local levels what can be built on a piece of land.


That's all you have? or all the smarties who live right on the ocean and want to ride out the storm and then need to be rescued. I don't know any other country that does not enforce mandatory evacuation...and goes and rescues them after they get in trouble.


Let's change that.
I thought all you Republicans are for more power to the States. I am for it. Pay for the messes you create yourselves.

Regulations could definitely improve supply reliability. Like minimal storage requirements, ability to pump without working electric grid, above flood level.
There are already regulations. My point to all of you is, that regulations can be good.


1. learn to spell banana
2. it's the typical respond I get when somebody has no good arguments

More fun than a barrell of monkeys.

Yes it does. Property rights is an integrated part of the free market. In other places it's more regulated what you can do with the property. Not by much, as there are many regulation on local levels what can be built on a piece of land.

So you have no point, an asinine rebuttal, but no real point.

That's all you have? or all the smarties who live right on the ocean and want to ride out the storm and then need to be rescued. I don't know any other country that does not enforce mandatory evacuation...and goes and rescues them after they get in trouble.

I figure people need to solve their own problems, I have problems of my own, But we have idiots and helpless people here and we need to save them when disaster strikes. Whatever I may think of people on a personal level kinda goes 'out the window' when they are stuck with disaster. If you are hungry and shelter-less, we should help them. That is just a Christian attitude of charity.

I thought all you Republicans are for more power to the States. I am for it. Pay for the messes you create yourselves.

Dude, get off your high-horse. This was a damm hurricane of rare proportion that is rare to ever happen. People are starving, suffering, and you are on here taking advantage of the misery to whine about your political gripes with this nation that have nothing to do with this disaster. Hate of free markets does NOT deter hurricanes.

Regulations could definitely improve supply reliability. Like minimal storage requirements, ability to pump without working electric grid, above flood level.
There are already regulations. My point to all of you is, that regulations can be good.

Problem. The gas was there in many cases, could not be pumped because of lack of electricity. Electricity hampered by [democrat supporting/socialist]union refusal to admit non-union help. You could regulate massive storage of gas, but the cost would ultimately mean the gas stations would be few and far between in the long run because the cost of opening/doing business is too much or they would not even be there at all.

1. learn to spell banana

I may not can spell bannana, but you are dumber than a box of rocks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A834CwzNHI

[syndicated]

I like free regulated market as the quality of live overall is better.
My son, born in Kansas did go back to my home country to study for a semester. He already talks to go back for graduate school and who knows, he will like it better over there. There are quite many Americans with means who live abroad. Why do you think that is?

+1 regulated free market.
Prevented the recession from killing my country's economy....

[jtrammel]

I like free regulated market as the quality of live overall is better.
My son, born in Kansas did go back to my home country to study for a semester. He already talks to go back for graduate school and who knows, he will like it better over there. There are quite many Americans with means who live abroad. Why do you think that is?

Maybe because they do not own their own companies in those countries. They made enough money in our free market to travel and be adventurous or their parents sheltered them and they don't have to work so they decide to explore the world on their parents dime.

[tostaos]

I thought all you Republicans are for more power to the States. I am for it. Pay for the messes you create yourselves.

Dude, get off your high-horse. This was a damm hurricane of rare proportion that is rare to ever happen. People are starving, suffering, and you are on here taking advantage of the misery to whine about your political gripes with this nation that have nothing to do with this disaster. Hate of free markets does NOT deter hurricanes.
Lol, rare? did we not just had one a year ago? Do you know that we have rapid climate change and this once every hundred year storms will be a lot more often?


Regulations could definitely improve supply reliability. Like minimal storage requirements, ability to pump without working electric grid, above flood level.
There are already regulations. My point to all of you is, that regulations can be good.

Problem. The gas was there in many cases, could not be pumped because of lack of electricity. Electricity hampered by [democrat supporting/socialist]union refusal to admit non-union help. You could regulate massive storage of gas, but the cost would ultimately mean the gas stations would be few and far between in the long run because the cost of opening/doing business is too much or they would not even be there at all. I am not only talking about a few gas stations, I am talking about heating oil, electricity, natural gas, communication, transportation...way above the level of your quarrels with unions...
Do you really think we deal with this disasters in a very good manner. Built all the shi* right in harms way to get wiped out every few years? Do you really think that's how a leading country in this world should deal with it? I have news for you. A few more of this disasters and the insurance industry will DICTATE what you can do. (or they just get out of this business and the FEDERAL government will have to take over as insurer as they already do for flooding. Yeah right, the free market works just fantastic, doesn't it.)


1. learn to spell banana

I may not can spell bannana, but you are dumber than a box of rocks. lmfao

[tostaos]

Maybe because they do not own their own companies in those countries. They made enough money in our free market to travel and be adventurous or their parents sheltered them and they don't have to work so they decide to explore the world on their parents dime.
The own parts of multi national companies what you probably still refer to as American companies. You sound like somebody who has never been anywhere else in the world. You had too much of this coolaid to believe, that the markets are all that free in the States. Do you know that it's the exception that you go from rag to riches? Families get wealthier and up the social ladder very slow over time. Not really different in the States than anywhere else.

[Tool-Slinger]

Lol, rare? did we not just had one a year ago? Do you know that we have rapid climate change and this once every hundred year storms will be a lot more often?

Not enough for your obviously warped mind-boggling post against capitalism that you had to take a deranged attack on global warming? You have lost your marbles, you post an an anti-capitalist thread, then lose any debate, then go off on phyco-algore-end world green bullsh1+ because you do not have any merit at all. You sir, have no merit. You are seething deranged bile.

If you do not like it here, go home.

I am sick of immigrants coming here and then complaining. You should be grateful. Thanking us for letting you in.

[Tool-Slinger]

Maybe because they do not own their own companies in those countries. They made enough money in our free market to travel and be adventurous or their parents sheltered them and they don't have to work so they decide to explore the world on their parents dime.

There are many blithering idiots who survive on the backs of United States companies, or companies international secured by United States influence. And there are many ungrateful snobs who do not appreciate this fact.

[barbar]

Lol, rare? did we not just had one a year ago? Do you know that we have rapid climate change and this once every hundred year storms will be a lot more often?

Not enough for your obviously warped mind-boggling post against capitalism that you had to take a deranged attack on global warming? You have lost your marbles, you post an an anti-capitalist thread, then lose any debate, then go off on phyco-algore-end world green bullsh1+ because you do not have any merit at all. You sir, have no merit. You are seething deranged bile.

If you do not like it here, go home.

I am sick of immigrants coming here and then complaining. You should be grateful. Thanking us for letting you in.

Wow man, pull your head in, that is going a tad to far!

Was you great country not built on the back immigrants and a wide range views.

[tostaos]

Not enough for your obviously warped mind-boggling post against capitalism that you had to take a deranged attack on global warming? You have lost your marbles, you post an an anti-capitalist thread, then lose any debate, then go off on phyco-algore-end world green bullsh1+ because you do not have any merit at all. You sir, have no merit. You are seething deranged bile.

If you do not like it here, go home.

I am sick of immigrants coming here and then complaining. You should be grateful. Thanking us for letting you in.
You are so funny but in the same token it's so sad for America of today. You are a clear sample of a failed education system. Educates kids just to be able to read but not comprehend.

There is no attack on capitalism, there was no mentioning of causes of global warming. You really need to get with the program. Global warming is here to stay and it doesn't matter what causes it. Denying it just makes you ignorant.

When Romney wins, I will start to pack my bags. It's not that easy to leave. I brought a lot of money to America and invested it. I have first to liquidate it. The problem is that the last republican administration caused huge losses from which I have first to recuperate from.

I should be grateful for what? Have to live in the same country with ignorant people like you?
What democratic concept is that where you want to ship everybody with a different view out of the country?

[Space Racer]

Should the fed govt subsidize flood insurance for people who build on the beach?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5M24wFd6D4k

[DeltaT]

OK. So let's go with your point of view. You are the regulator that makes up these rules to protect everyone from building too close to the ocean so where is the line at which building can no longer be done? Is is 100 feet, 200feet, 500 feet from the ocean? Answer this if you would.

[Space Racer]

OK. So let's go with your point of view. You are the regulator that makes up these rules to protect everyone from building too close to the ocean so where is the line at which building can no longer be done? Is is 100 feet, 200feet, 500 feet from the ocean? Answer this if you would.

Is this a response to my (#22) post?

Why regulate?

Let people pay for their own flood insurance. If they want to build in a low-lying area near the water, let them take their own risk.

Why should those of us who choose to take less risk subsidize those who make bad decisions, who don't need the money, and/or who take more risk, only to pay for the repairs when disaster strikes?

If you decide to live in an avalanche-prone area, should I pay to rebuild your house every time the snow knocks your house over? Should I pay for your avalanche insurance?

Why should I pay for your stupidity?

[DeltaT]

Because my stupidity benefits you. I'm not taking sides just pointing out why things like this exist from my real estate point of view.

Most every city in the US has a flood plain plan. It's been that way since the 70's. You can buy a house in the flood plain if your want. It's your choice but you need to be notified about that sitution before you buy the home/property. For that you will pay a higher insurance premium.

And with that higher insurance premium goes a gamble that when your house does get flooded the insurance company will pay along with the guarantee from the local and/or Federal Government.

I'm betting a few on here own homes/property located in a designated flood plain.

Why are homes/properties allowed to be built in a flood plain? Because it's good for the communtiy and the people who want to live in that community. More houses equal more people equal more taxes for the local community equal better schools, streets, maintenance, etc, etc, etc.

If houses/properties were not allowed to be built on the chance of a flood within that 100 years (which is typical) there would be a tremendous drop in the availabilty of homes for families and a tremendous increase in the home prices for those not listed in a floor plain.

It's that simple. It's a matter of demand vs. a gamble. Probably half of the East Coast Properties that have been built would not be in existance should strick regulations been in place. Keep in mind this applies not only to ocean but more to creeks, rivers and any body of water inland too.

Most all if not all of those people who lost their homes or had damage to them near the ocean have been paying for insurance including higher premiums because of their coastal locations. And that goes as well for the guy in Montana who has a housing developement next to a creek that is designated as a floor plain of some sort.

[jtrammel]

The own parts of multi national companies what you probably still refer to as American companies. You sound like somebody who has never been anywhere else in the world. You had too much of this coolaid to believe, that the markets are all that free in the States. Do you know that it's the exception that you go from rag to riches? Families get wealthier and up the social ladder very slow over time. Not really different in the States than anywhere else.

What?

[tostaos]

Because my stupidity benefits you. I'm not taking sides just pointing out why things like this exist from my real estate point of view.

Most every city in the US has a flood plain plan. It's been that way since the 70's. You can buy a house in the flood plain if your want. It's your choice but you need to be notified about that sitution before you buy the home/property. For that you will pay a higher insurance premium.

And with that higher insurance premium goes a gamble that when your house does get flooded the insurance company will pay along with the guarantee from the local and/or Federal Government.

I'm betting a few on here own homes/property located in a designated flood plain.

Why are homes/properties allowed to be built in a flood plain? Because it's good for the communtiy and the people who want to live in that community. More houses equal more people equal more taxes for the local community equal better schools, streets, maintenance, etc, etc, etc.

If houses/properties were not allowed to be built on the chance of a flood within that 100 years (which is typical) there would be a tremendous drop in the availabilty of homes for families and a tremendous increase in the home prices for those not listed in a floor plain.

It's that simple. It's a matter of demand vs. a gamble. Probably half of the East Coast Properties that have been built would not be in existance should strick regulations been in place. Keep in mind this applies not only to ocean but more to creeks, rivers and any body of water inland too.

Most all if not all of those people who lost their homes or had damage to them near the ocean have been paying for insurance including higher premiums because of their coastal locations. And that goes as well for the guy in Montana who has a housing developement next to a creek that is designated as a floor plain of some sort.
You sum it up pretty good. The big question is: Is it worth it? I seriously doubt it.

[ga-hvac-tech]

While we are on the subject of living too close to water... here is a statistic: 50%+ of the entire population of the USA lives within 75 miles of the ocean. Look it up.

So if living too close to water is sooo dumb, why is it where everyone lives?

BTW: It used to be within 50 miles of the ocean... however we ran out of ocean front space.

[tostaos]

While we are on the subject of living too close to water... here is a statistic: 50%+ of the entire population of the USA lives within 75 miles of the ocean. Look it up.

So if living too close to water is sooo dumb, why is it where everyone lives?

BTW: It used to be within 50 miles of the ocean... however we ran out of ocean front space. I doubt we will have anytime soon a tidal wave hitting miles inland. So, what is your point? Try to play stupid?

[AStudent]

I doubt we will have anytime soon a tidal wave hitting miles inland. So, what is your point? Try to play stupid?

His point is that why if so many people live close to the water is it a dumb thing to do.....well people like shiny things, and the ocean is beautiful.

Also our first major cities were founded near the ocean, that's how we received supplies...not to mention the frontier was much scarier than any storms that might hit.

Asking that question is sorta like saying the majority of Americancare overweight, if it's a bad thing to be obese then why is everyone fat?

[ga-hvac-tech]

I doubt we will have anytime soon a tidal wave hitting miles inland. So, what is your point? Try to play stupid?

Ya know Tosty, you are sounding more and more and more like the loud-mouth liberals that are more interested in tooting their horn than making sense. You are a smart guy when it comes to doing HVAC and running a small business... just not sure how you lost it when it comes to politics. I like you as a person and you/I have had some good conversations both on the forum and in PM's... However: If your plan is to rip off my country and leave... that is not acceptable. My country comes first... it is called patriotism... "America, Love it or leave it". Maybe we need to make it even tougher than it is now to get into the country or stay here.

To answer your question: I grew up in Houston Texas... approximately 50 miles from the ocean at Galveston. Every 4-5 years we had a hurricane that shut down the town for a week or more. No elec, flooded streets, no city services, no commerce, etc... and that was 50 miles (yes, 50 miles) from the ocean. So yes... there is a reason for the comment.

Now back to the discussion: A wise man thinks in long terms... a fool thinks in short terms. It does not take a rocket scientist (or even a high school graduate) to sort out which one is which.

And with that, I have a LONG list of heat issues to deal with Monday... so I am gone.

You guys figure it out... I will live my life as an American that LOVES his country.

[tostaos]

check this out
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/11/new-york-can-be-a-vibrant-venice-as-sea-level-now-rises-say-engineers/

[ga-hvac-tech]

Yeah, that idea was proposed a couple of decades ago... when the last global warming scare was not proved to be false.

Problem is; too much of infrastructure (elec, subways, communications, steam, building support boilers, mechanical rooms, etc) are all underground. Moving them to upper levels would be a a huge expense.

[tostaos]

there is no global warming scare. Global warming is happening for a while now. You need to pull your head out of the sand and face it. Just rebuilding what you have makes no sense, you have to adapt. When you have a hundred year flood, you need to prepare for a 500 year flood. When you don't do that you just get the same results. another disaster...and they cost every time more, as overbuilt more and more.

[Six]

I guess its too much to ask people who chose to live on an Island, on the Coast or in a Lake (New Orleans) to do the responsible thing.

To prepare themselves for the inevitable both financially and with food and water.

But nope. The sense of entitlement wins over common sense in certain parts of our Nation.

And there is no Republican President to blame it on .

That exains the lack of up close and personal human suffering we had access to 3 days after Katrina.

[DeltaT]

You sum it up pretty good. The big question is: Is it worth it? I seriously doubt it.

Everytime I go to California (just got back from LA) I ask myself how stupid can these people be. They live right on top of a fault most anywhere you go in California. Yet millions think it's worth it to live there. Go figure.

[motoguy128]

His point is that why if so many people live close to the water is it a dumb thing to do.....well people like shiny things, and the ocean is beautiful.

Also our first major cities were founded near the ocean, that's how we received supplies...not to mention the frontier was much scarier than any storms that might hit.

Asking that question is sorta like saying the majority of Americancare overweight, if it's a bad thing to be obese then why is everyone fat?


Im not fat, but I live on a major river. I guess they cancel each other out. :) Then again im 80 feet elevated so no flooding but there is a remote risk of a landslide I suppose.

I dont think itsn unreasonable to leave it up to actuaries to do their job and calculate risk, then price policies accordingly.
It sort of reminds me of recluses and nut balls that evade taxes. You cannot isolate yourself completely from services provided by the government. Defense, clean air, clean water, access to trade, laws to protect you rights, etc. Call it taxes, call it paying tribute, or a bribe, a donation, extortion, it a littlenof each. Insurance is not so different since you can pay in $$$ and recieve $$$$ in return. :)

Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

[motoguy128]

I got one. Name a place in the us that is free from natural disasters. Heres a hint.... its a trick question... there significant risk everywhere.



Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

[Six]

Im not fat, but I live on a major river. I
guess they cancel each other out. :) Then again im 80 feet elevated so no flooding but there is a remote risk of a landslide I suppose.

I dont think itsn unreasonable to leave it up to actuaries to do their job and calculate risk, then price policies accordingly.
It sort of reminds me of recluses and nut balls that evade taxes. You cannot isolate yourself completely from services provided by the government. Defense, clean air, clean water, access to trade, laws to protect you rights, etc. Call it taxes, call it paying tribute, or a bribe, a donation, extortion, it a littlenof each. Insurance is not so different since you can pay in $$$ and recieve $$$$ in return. :)

Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

MOTO I was watching hurricane coverage of a coast line off Jersey when a woman stepped up and lamented to the reporter that insurance coverage for their ruined homes was too expensive so most didn't carry any.

Now who's responsibillity is it ?

Americans who have been brought up with a entitlement mentality expect the FEDS to rebuild for them.

Provide for them ?

[DeltaT]

I got one. Name a place in the us that is free from natural disasters. Heres a hint.... its a trick question... there significant risk everywhere.

Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

The present day White House. Their exists no natural disasters there as all the disasters there are not natural......

[Six]

I got one. Name a place in the us that is
free from natural disasters. Heres a hint.... its a trick question... there significant risk everywhere.



Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

Sorry but there are obvious areas of our nation where the home owner should be just a bit more concerned than the average inlander during the Hurricane season.

If Insurance companies can figure that out so can you.

[motoguy128]

Dont be a jerk. Your forgetting tornados, floods, wildfires, landslides, earthquakes, blizzards, regular storms, hail. My point is that risk lies in every corner. Yes some are statistically more catestrophic and occur at a greater feequncy, but you cant escape risk. Weve had 2 500yr floods here in the last 20 years.

At some point however it might make sense to adopt more robust building codes, elevate homes and do things that other flood prone areas do.

Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

[Six]

Dont be a jerk. Your forgetting tornados, floods, wildfires, landslides, earthquakes, blizzards, regular
storms, hail. My point is that risk lies in every corner. Yes some are statistically more catestrophic and occur at a greater feequncy, but you cant escape risk. Weve had 2 500yr floods here in the last 20 years.

At some point however it might make sense to adopt more robust building codes, elevate homes and do things that other flood prone areas do.

Sent from my SGPT12 using Tapatalk 2

I'm a jerk because I related the ovbious ?

I'm a jerk because I along with millions of Americans and Insurance adjustors relealize the obvious implication of living on the Coast ?

I'm a jerk because I don't agree with your goofy assertion that "there is a signifigant risk everywhere " ?

I'm a jerk because I understand that universal broad based anouncements like "there is a signifigant rusk everywhere " when discussing the HUGE difference between living on the coast and living inland are usually just the ramblings of a poster who has chosen to be intellectual lazy rather than put a inkling of thought int their post ?

I'm a jerk because I'm supposed to equate the damage from storms like the Great Galveston Storm, Andrew, Katrina, Sandy, Ivan, Alicia, Hugo, Camille, or the Hurricane of 1938 to some inland dust up.

Yep, to point out the obvious does come off to some as being obnoxious, but Ill bear that cross as long as you continue to post rhetoric like " there is signifigant risk everywhere" without a detailed explanation of said nonsense.