Nominal vs. Real
Posted by Barbara on March 20, 2006 at 07:42:41:

Obviously, when I said it was an 866% increase, I was stating the increase in nominal terms, not in real terms taking inflation into account.

I still contend that the increase in grants is very generous. Yes, the cost of building a house has increased significantly over the past 35 years, particularly in more recent years with the cost of metal and concrete sky-rocketing. But can the government (read the American taxpayer) afford to settle every claim that will arise for every crack in stucco, for every block wall or chimney knocked over, for every hairline crack in a driveway? The claims submitted to FEMA will be staggering if a catastrophic earthquake occurs.

I was trying to make a point that people should exhibit personal responsibility and have earthquake insurance beforehand...not just wait for the government (the American taxpayer, like me and millions of other Americans) to step in and give them a handout. Yes, earthquake insurance is expensive, but so is the investment in one's house. Why should I, as a taxpayer, have to pay to help you fix up your house when you should have done the responsible thing in the first place and bought earthquake insurance? Why pass that risk on to me and make me pay for it? If one is going to live in earthquake country, one should be prepared. And that means not just having your flashlight, your whistle and your emergency water handy.

Let's turn the tables -- does it make you mad when people build their pricey homes on the outer banks of the eastern seashore where they never should have built in the first place. A hurricane comes along, destroys their place and the government (the taxpayer) comes in and gives them the money to rebuild IN THE SAME PLACE. Does that bother you?

It's the same thing. If there were no FEMA loans and grants in the future, I'll bet there would be more earthquake insurance being sold. If people realized that an earthquake could destroy their investment in their house and there would be no government handouts, I'll bet they would be better prepared. But instead they cry about how expensive the insurance is and how high the deductible is and how it's going to hurt me, me, me. "I'll save the money now and let the government (the taxpayer) pick up the tab later." Insurance is part of owning a valuable asset. This shouldn't be a pick and choose matter. "Oh, I'll just take the fire insurance and give me some of that theft insurance, but don't give me any of that expensive earthquake insurance. I'll have my American neighbors pay for rebuilding my house when an earthquake destroys it, thank you very much."

Personal responsibility -- some people have it, some people don't. And judging by how few homeowners in California have earthquake insurance, I would say that most people don't.

Barbara


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Nominal vs. Real - Skywise  17:39:30 - 3/20/2006  (34971)  (1)
        ● Earthquake insurance - Barbara  20:57:10 - 3/20/2006  (34976)  (1)
           ● Re: Earthquake insurance - Skywise  23:23:33 - 3/20/2006  (34981)  (1)
              ● BTW - Barbara  06:25:36 - 3/21/2006  (34988)  (0)