Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion
How is it harming the taxpayer?
|
It comes down to the net present value and effectiveness of the measures they are prescribing. For instance, tile is great in a flood in that you can take it out and wash, but is that better value than simply throwing away a carpet? Either way, if you get flooded, you need labour.
Furthermore, compared to the alternative (suggested by myself and by the Liberals, independently) of a government-run insurance program, the government's program places a far greater burden on the general taxpayer.
And finally, there's a good chance that collective mitigation (e.g. re-doing parts of our storm sewers) would be more cost effective than individual mitigation. If the government were to implement an insurance program, it could divert premiums to collective mitigation on a cost/benefit basis.