More insurance companies are fleeing the state because of the growing threat from natural disasters.
Told ya.
Now that the insurance have lifted the taboo of stopping insuring people for climatic reason you will see more of those action everywhere.
hopefully this is the monetary incentive required not to build in stupid places with lax regulations … but i doubt it.
That’s fine, but what happens when this expands with the the increasing effects of climate change? What happens when Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas health insurance costs triple because of the risks of extreme heat? What about New Orleans or locations prone to extreme storms or hurricanes?
Huge patches of countries all over the world are soon to become uninsurable because climate change makes it too dangerous to live there.
Yup. People gonna have to move.
Remember when people said that climate change would cost us trillions of dollars? This is why.
And it’s gonna suck for most of us in a lot of ways. Like I moved up north partially because of politics back in 2014. Now some are eventually gonna follow and move up here as well. Plus, I can’t afford a house. A lot of people can’t afford one. But when more and more people come, we won’t have enough. Unless we see some real, meaningful changes in the way we handle housing, it’s gonna be a shit show.
I was talking to my mom back in I think 2020 and the subject of the cost of a home came up. I told her how much they are here, and she said me and my boyfriend should move near her and some other family in St Louis. While I would love to be near family, I’m gay. I’m not moving to a red state. And I’m not looking to buy a house I will eventually need to abandon with no one buying it. That’s a lot of money to just lose.
A house is worth peanuts without water, this should be priority number one when purchasing a house. We should avoid cities and move closer to mountains where the rain will provide enough stream.
Plenty of cities have good access to water. It’s why most of them were built where they were in the first place. And for the most part, it’s the way you have the least impact on the environment.
Plenty of cities have good access to water. It’s why most of them were built where they were in the first place.
That’s the way it used to be.
Take the Rio Grande:
Water restrictions ordered in Rio Grande Valley as drought persists
‘The actual lake is gone,’ Zapata County judge says
McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) — The two largest cities in the Rio Grande Valley have implemented mandatory water restrictions as water levels in two reservoirs hit near-record lows due to an ongoing drought.
Rathmell gave Border Report a tour of diminishing Falcon Lake on Thursday, and at the time advocated that cities downstream in the Rio Grande Valley should be forced to conserve water.
Rathmell said that Falcon Lake is basically no more. It’s just an area where the Rio Grande river runs through.
Cities will become traps. It was convenient before but now it is becoming a death trap, don’t purchase a house there, you become dependent on someone bringing food and water to you. If you are in the business of searching for a house, avoid cities.
You’re cherry picking your examples. Most cities still do have great access to water. And that “dependence” is called civilization. Everyone has their own jobs to do so that we’re not all each our own homestead living off grid. It’s more efficient and resilient that way.
- argv_minus_one ( @argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) 2•1 year ago
Move how? They can’t sell their houses because their houses are gone and no longer covered by insurance. People can’t pay two mortgages.
Those people are all going to be homeless.
We’re really gonna need to colonize another planet eventually.
It’d be easier & cheaper to fix this one.
We’re going to have to break a few eggs though, since we waited so long.
By eggs I mean multinational corporations.
Some scientists theorize we’ve already passed the red line. The rest is just crowd control. Those eggs are gonna be broken but they’re probably gonna be a few billion people. Best to plan for the worst, hope for the best and doing both climate science and technical advances towards colonization.
It’s not like the research and funding needs to go to one or the other. Never understood that argument, like what 10,000s of astrophysicists and engineers are just gonna be like “yeah let’s all stop or research today to save humanity” lmao.
- argv_minus_one ( @argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) 1•1 year ago
Colonizing other planets is not a solution. It is vastly harder to terraform Mars than to repair the damage we’ve done to Earth. Multiple technological Holy Grails must be discovered in order to make it even remotely possible. Not happening.
A colony established on Mars with current technology would be completely dependent on Earth for food and other supplies.
If we’ve passed the red line already, then it’s all over and we may as well live it up while we still can.
I didn’t say terraform.
“If I had a gun, with two bullets, and I was in a room with Automobile, Aviation and Advertisement, I would shoot Advertisement twice.”
I hope the broken eggs are billionaires’ nuts.
We say goodbye to our quality of life.
Pensions are a result of our capacity to produce wealth, but as the cost of life will rise those pensions will be slowly erased. You’d better spare money as young as possible. The climate is guaranteed to get warmer for at least 20 years, whatever we do now. Based on the fact that we are not doing anything anyway you can safely bet on a constant raise of temperature for 40 years. So your pension will be your life savings.
Arizona and the region of the lake Mead will probably stop honoring the laws about water, you know, a state cannot confiscate all the water for himself yadayada
The importance of being vegan in one picture. But by now it’s too late anyway.
Isn’t the bulk of that livestock feed going to Saudi?
I know that in New Mexico there are farmers growing Alfalfa using up a good amount of our water and it all goes to the Saudis.
What about New Orleans or locations prone to extreme storms or hurricanes?
It has already been happening in New Orleans for years now. There are very few insurers left.
Time to buy some property in Alaska
Except Florida’s building code is more robust because of hurricanes, so it is more regulated than other states. They had lax standards up until 1993 when hurricane Andrew wiped Homestead, FL off the map over the course of a weekend. In 1996 they strengthened the building code to account for better construction methods to deal with hurricanes and tropical storms.
FTR, I’m not advocating for people that decide to move to Florida, I lived there myself from 1996 to 1999, and I have family that still reside in the state. The political climate in Florida is so much different now than it was back when I lived there…the “head in the sand” when it comes to climate change is real, and up until the water creeps into their living rooms in Tallahassee they might admit it’s real.
Their codes are decent, but their construction firms and inspections have a reputation for putting up actual structures well below code, to put it mildly.
Building codes are only as good as their enforcement. If the firms aren’t competent enough to implement them and the local councils don’t have the will to punish bad actors, they mean nothing. And given that Florida is already in a nation-setting inflation crisis, I truly doubt they’ll be changing policy in a way that makes homes more expensive – like strictly enforcing code – any time soon.
Could you cite an article that proves that? I’m not trying to be confrontational here. I’m just making a statement on Florida’s building code. Because there is a definite improvement and difference between pre Andrew and post Andrew construction in Florida. It is visibly evident in construction methodology.
By its nature, the discussion is going to be financially motivated (typically by realty/inspection firms peddling wares or construction firms insisting their work standards are great). The reason for this is straightforward; the inspections/construction are almost entirely private and there are virtually no reporting requirements for issues, so most of those issues are invisible to the public (they get fixed privately if at all).
So you can easily find stuff like this, which I admit is basically marketing material for a service vendor. But it’s a quite robust industry for a reason.
It’s really very hard to make objective claims one way or the other. These things are very hidden from the public, so the stories are inherently anecdotal. But I’ve lived in a few places in the world, and when I lived adjacent to this Florida stuff, the stories of just shoddy workmanship were every day. Texas also has a similarly bad reputation in my experience. I could link a bunch of news stories about homeowners that went public with lawsuits against builders, but that probably would not be persuasive.
But it’s a fair criticism. I really can’t back it up. It’s just my opinion, and I do not trust developers, especially large developers, and especially large developers in the south, and especially especially large developers in Florida, to not try to sell a pig in a poke to ignorant buyers. That was the lesson of Surfside, to me. That the government in Florida isn’t looking out for you and the developers don’t care if you die, they just want their money.
This is happening sooner than I anticipated. How about Florida spend less time fighting culture wars and more time getting to work on building those seawalls.
I am under the impression that Sea Walls will accomplish nothing. Their water table limestone, so to speak. They are going to b3 drinking salt water tears before their houses are permanently flooded.
i read this is a scream, took me a while to figure it out
- argv_minus_one ( @argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) 1•1 year ago
They’re going to go out of business, then. No part of the country is safe from global warming.