On one hand, sometimes I feel like most insurance should be the government’s job.
On the other hand, if climate change is making some areas really hard to live in, maybe we should consider closing down or moving whole cities instead of trying so hard to stay.
It would be a very expensive political decision, but a necessary one. The government could exchange the lands that keep getting destroyed or are at high risk for lower risk areas and subsidise greener infrastructure in them. While the riskier places could be cleared and rewilded where possible.
But the expense of doing so may not be affordable for governments that already have high deficits.
Risks and losses cannot be extinguished, they can only be transferred to others. This is the intrinsic limit of political fixes: we take the risks and losses and transfer them to others lacking the political power to contest the transfer.
It’s going to be the next big and serious political issue. Who gets bailed out?
World is becoming unprofitable I guess might as well milk it for all we can get before we move to the next… oh wait…
“the world”
Hey where’s Alaska
The world? Nah. Just the US.
US Defaultism
He’s going to have a shock when someone shows him a globe .
Maybe if people would stop living in places where natural disasters regularly happen without significantly adjusting their goddamn building strategies to create structures that not only survive, but also remain safe living spaces during these events for fucks sake.
I do wonder what the building cost differences are and if the costs are lowered by building denser urbanism instead of sprawl.
Okay so if the taxpayers don’t want the risk and the bill, we should put transfer this risk to those most responsible: fossil fuel companies, and oligarchs.
They must pay for flood, fire, hurricane and drought damages which they have wrought through their excess carbon emissions. They must rebuild homes in suitable locations for the conditions they have caused.
I’m surprised to see several midwestern and northeastern states considered to be somewhat of a climate haven show up repeatedly, and it makes me wonder what other non-climate effects (e.g. financial, legislative) may be at play as well.
most likely flooding or tornadoes.
