Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
Actually this makes sense to me. No matter if it's through insurance or gov't bailouts, the bottom line is that everybody is chipping in to cover the losses. Maybe if it was up to insurance, people who choose to live so close to rivers and on flood plains might pay a higher premium. It might be a way to discourage building where it isn't safe.
I'm not saying that anybody deserved what happened this week; nor should they have to lose everything they own over this. However it a way to reduce the risks going forward.
|
I don't know this to be the case, and it might ruffle some feathers, but I'll ask it anyway. Is this type of loss fortuitous? (I'm using that in the insurance sense of the word here, before anyone gets bent out of shape and suggests otherwise!). What I mean is are these events entirely unforeseen and not preventable?
I have a hard time with this to be honest. Take a home that is say 40-50 feet away from river (its the back boundary of their yard). That seems like the chances of a loss are almost certain.