LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 77

Thread: WTF Hurricanes

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    in the grace of the most holy FSM
    Posts
    3,508
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    You obviously haven't read my other posts! I'm perfectly aware of the white situation that's recently occured in cape cod(which isn't the mid atlantic) When was the last GW attack in nj?
    2005, smart guy: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/8144414/#.UhLG-7zcbKk

    it's pretty pathetic & hypocritical that you're advocating the culling of sharks to prevent attacks when you want to turn my home into a nature preserve.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by njsurfer42 View Post
    2005, smart guy: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/8144414/#.UhLG-7zcbKk

    it's pretty pathetic & hypocritical that you're advocating the culling of sharks to prevent attacks when you want to turn my home into a nature preserve.
    Do you really think his foot would still be attached with a white shark attack? Just saying. Maybe a test bite. First attack in 30 years. How many did a certain area of Australia have just last few years alone? 5 fatalities or so. Really no comparison and the fact that you think NJ currently is big time gw shark attack risk shows incredible ignorance. Just look at the statistics. Last fatality was 1916 and millions are in the ocean vs very few people in central cali for example, which has had multiple fatalities the past couple of years.

    It's pathetic that you value the life of a few dead fish over a human being. Truly sick. I find your viewpoint disgusting.


    You live oceanfront? I said to turn the oceanfront into a nature preserve and not even all of it. Just a lot of it. The immediate coastal area's are too developed. I see nothing wrong with that. Somebody bitten in half is dead or maimed for life. A little different than you having to move a block or two. Get over yourself.
    Last edited by shark-hunter; Aug 20, 2013 at 03:14 AM.

  3. #63
    So, what about people that live in the Mid West and have tornado damage? Screw em, right? Or when there's an earthquake in Cali, screw them too? Forest fires? Let them suffer too?
    What happens when you have insurance and you've been paying for 30 years (like my parents)? And then when it's time to collect because your home floods and they don't even cover half.
    We have FEMA to help when we are in need... If you don't like it move somewhere else.

    Quote Originally Posted by pinkstink View Post
    I'm glad someone said it!

    On a more serious note, I'm all for people living as close as they want to the beachfront BUT not when the cost gets bucked to taxpayers like myself. One thing that I don't think has been mentioned yet is the issue of FEMA subsidizing insurance for flood prone areas. I think it was talked about in the Sandy thread though.

    I had to check my facts on Wikipedia but basically what happened in the 50s is that insurance companies stopped insuring homes on the coast and flood plains because they were losing money. Eventually, however, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was created by the government to provide flood insurance for those in flood prone areas. The NFIP was supposed to be self-sufficient but they donít charge the full rate they should because a lot of homeowners canít afford it. They keep running up huge deficits and borrowing from the Treasury to keep solvent.

    So taxpayers pay for people, rich and poor, to be able to live on the coast. Thatís the real issue. It doesnít matter what size house you have. If you live on the coast you should be paying insurance based on the real costs and risks of living there.

    That is all.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...urance_Program

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by nynj View Post
    So, what about people that live in the Mid West and have tornado damage? Screw em, right? Or when there's an earthquake in Cali, screw them too? Forest fires? Let them suffer too?
    What happens when you have insurance and you've been paying for 30 years (like my parents)? And then when it's time to collect because your home floods and they don't even cover half.
    We have FEMA to help when we are in need... If you don't like it move somewhere else.
    Of course they should be covered.
    My issue is more with the fact that we shouldn't be subsidizing million dollar homes so they can have insurance. Apparently, according to some of the people here, oceanfront property in nj is inexpensive. That's b.s. of course.

    Earthquakes/forest fires/tornadoes can happen over a HUGE area.(entire states!) So of course they should be covered. Their not building in some super high risk area. People who build multi-million dollar homes on stilts on the beach should not be getting bail outs from tax payers. Current law subsidizes their insurance. It shouldn't.

  5. #65
    FEMA operates under the department of homeland security, an extension of the patriot act, the brain-child of war criminals like GW Bush and **** Cheney. By association alone I don't trust FEMA. The resources preparedness act...check that one out if you want to have nightmares.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    In a state of flux
    Posts
    3,383
    while i don't buy into your archy-esque hysteria, fema does suck.

  7. #67
    FEMA used to be a pretty good operation before it was absorbed by DHS. DHS grabbed a lot of FEMA's resources and never paid much attention to it or it's mission. They're too busy collecting emails and harassing journalists.

  8. #68
    I understand what you are saying... I know you're only talking about the beachfront property that is extremely vulnerable...
    I was replying more to Pinkstink's commenting on people living on the coast.

    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    Of course they should be covered.
    My issue is more with the fact that we shouldn't be subsidizing million dollar homes so they can have insurance. Apparently, according to some of the people here, oceanfront property in nj is inexpensive. That's b.s. of course.

    Earthquakes/forest fires/tornadoes can happen over a HUGE area.(entire states!) So of course they should be covered. Their not building in some super high risk area. People who build multi-million dollar homes on stilts on the beach should not be getting bail outs from tax payers. Current law subsidizes their insurance. It shouldn't.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by ClemsonSurf View Post
    Here's a question for you coastal folks. How come so many of you were uninsured? Maybe you don't have mortgages?
    Because in an overwhelming amount of cases insurance company's will not insure coastal homeowners, specifically because of the risk of hurricane damage.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by shark-hunter View Post
    Earthquakes/forest fires/tornadoes can happen over a HUGE area.(entire states!) So of course they should be covered. Their not building in some super high risk area. People who build multi-million dollar homes on stilts on the beach should not be getting bail outs from tax payers. Current law subsidizes their insurance. It shouldn't.
    Earthquakes typically affect much smaller regions than hurricanes and I believe Cali may have a requirement for Quake insurance that has some gov't subsidy. Quake prone zones are pretty well understood and could be avoided if you wanted. The reason that we have had so many fire fighter deaths recently in forest fires is that people also like building nice houses (both millionaires and not) in the forest near mountains. Now the gov't has to prevent fires that in many cases should and could be allowed to burn themselves out naturally and restart a natural cycle. At least in hurricanes, the majority of the damage is property. We dont have people out in boats trying to block the waves!! Although it costs alot to rebuild bridges, roads, sewers, etc.

    Upshot is that we have lots of people and the places that are the nicest to live often have risk. Either we all cross cover each other through the gov't (FEMA, Cat fund, etc) or allow the private markets to do it through insurance. In all cases there is a transfer of risk and money that the beneficiaries will like and the others will not. And to be sustainable, it will have to be expensive because the risk is high and real. If the subsidy is removed, the rest of the coast will look like the Hamptons where only people who can afford to rebuild their houses or pay $30k+ per year in insurance can live. Population density will certainly go down which would be a pretty interesting process...

    In terms of the high cost of coastal or prime mountain real estate, that is the much bigger issue of wealth dispersion which I am not going to touch. But the fact is that whatever your views on it, lower income people will be priced out of many areas that perhaps they used to be able to afford. Personally, I think it unfortunate but thats what our societal priorities are.

    may Bill be the model for all future Hurricanes (with apologies to anyone in the Carrib who had their house wrecked and their insurance not pay for it or anyone else who finds this offensive...)