Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, September 29, 2019

Mass migration begins as coastal homes are bulldozed in the state facing the biggest threat from climate-driven inundation.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

...and yet, weirdly, there are homes priced at 750K+ being built, en masse, near Key Largo-Islamorada, evidently with the Miami weekender market in mind.

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2019-09-29 10:08 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Good. I've been saying this for years. We should abolish all incentives for people to live in flood-prone areas, like the federal flood insurance program Additionally, a moratorium on new construction should be imposed, and a climate property tax in these areas to pay for future emergencies.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 10:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Good time to get a Key West property cheap!

#3 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-09-29 11:04 AM | Reply

The scale of this is almost unfathomable," said Billy Fleming, a landscape architecture professor at the University of Pennsylvania. "If we take any of the climate science seriously, we're down to the last 10 to 12 years to mobilize the full force of the government and move on managed retreat. If we don't, it won't matter, because much of America will be underwater or on fire."

Yeah, sure '----. Don't these people understand that such over-the-top hysteria turns people off to reasonable, sober public policies?

#4 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 11:16 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

No Nullifidian they do not. While I fancy my self as a conservative, I do understand the value of trees and reducing green house gases to the maximum extent possible, with-in reason. I will not give up my AC, ice boxes, TV or computer. This year alone I have planted 10 new trees to replace the 5 that lighting has taken out over the past 3 years. I wanted to install solar panels, but when I was told the price would be 30 grand, I backed off. I then went to a company that builds home level wind power and they only wanted 25 grand. When I asked about batteries to cover for when the sun did not shine or the wind did not blow hard enough, I was told that the cost was not worth the reward and that in short falls, I would have to use the grid, but I may be able to off set that cost by selling back my excess power, at the rate of 1/4th the cost of the grid power. Further, I was informed that by law, I had to be tied to the Grid to live in my house and I would have to pay the electric company ninety dollars a month for the grid connection, even if I do not use any power. Until the costs come down or the rewards are better then the loss, I will stayed tied to the Grid, which is an oil fired plant.

#5 | Posted by LittleJake at 2019-09-29 11:48 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

" Good. I've been saying this for years. We should abolish all incentives for people to live in flood-prone areas, like the federal flood insurance program Additionally, a moratorium on new construction should be imposed, and a climate property tax in these areas to pay for future emergencies.

#2 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2019-09-29 10:24 AM | FLAG: "

Why just flood prone areas? What about tornadoes? Wild fire? Inland flooding due to rainfall? Snowstorms? Earthquakes? Volcanoes? This link shows that there is basically nowhere in the US to live that does not have inherent natural disaster problems, with all but the last 2 I listed likely to be exacerabated by rising temperatures.

resizer.shared.arcpublishing.com

I assume since you've listed the criteria to be applied to flood prone areas, these meet your definition of " sober public policies" and you would have no issue with them being applied countrywide.

#6 | Posted by Foreigner at 2019-09-29 12:45 PM | Reply

--What about tornadoes? Wild fire? Inland flooding due to rainfall? Snowstorms? Earthquakes? Volcanoes?

Unlike hurricanes, there is no earthquake season that occurs in specific areas on a predictable, yearly basis. Or a volcano season. If people choose to live in an area that gets heavy snowfall or rain, they are free to do so. Not a federal problem.

#7 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 12:54 PM | Reply

Why just flood prone areas? What about tornadoes? Wild fire? Inland flooding due to rainfall? Snowstorms? Earthquakes? Volcanoes?

Terrible comparison for tornadoes, snowstorms, earthquakes or volcanoes.

Draining wetlands, constructing levees and building in coastal areas prone to storm surges on a regular basis is no where close to the others you list.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-29 01:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#7 The exodus in Florida, if the article is to be believed, is related to the threat of general sea level rises rendering coastal property uninhabitable, not to hurricane flooding per se. How does this differ from seasonal risk of fire, exacerbated by climate related events such as prolonged drought conditions? Or seasonal inland and river basin flooding due to higher rainfall levels, again driven over time by higher temperatures? Or flooding related to snowmelt?

As for earthquakes and volcanoes, agreed they are not seasonal, although they are very much limited to specific areas. They are however, inevitable. Should a moratorium on construction be imposed in areas vulnerable to such disasters? Should property owners be taxed to cover future losses?

When you suggest these things are not a federal problem, are you suggesting that FEMA does not provide assistance to a wide variety of disasters? Here is a link to the FEMA website:

www.fema.gov

Click on the incident type box, you might be surprised what FEMA assists with.

If you feel it is a sober public policy to withdraw federal assistance to coastal flooding victims, place a moratorium on building and impose appropriately targeted property taxes, is it not equitable to extend these policies to all areas of the country subject to either seasonal or inevitable disaster?

#9 | Posted by Foreigner at 2019-09-29 01:36 PM | Reply

Article is just so much clickbait for for the 'climate change' doomsayers. The FL Keys are doing just find, so go, kick back and party there on your next vacation.

#10 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-29 02:21 PM | Reply

When is Rcade moving?

#11 | Posted by Ray at 2019-09-29 02:33 PM | Reply

#8 - I am not suggesting that all forms of natural disaster are equal; simply that there is nowhere in the continental US that you can live without there being a credible threat of natural disaster occurring. I recognize that volcanoes and earthquakes are outliers, clearly subject to long periods of inactivity, but local events are quite common and the major disasters are inevitable.

If federal assistance for one type of weather/climate/natural disaster related risk is to be denied, it should be denied to all such risks. The fact that one particular type of risk is the first to possibly manifest longer term climate changes should not warrant special treatment; rather it should be the impetus for developing a federal strategic plan to address evolving disaster events of all sorts.

As for your " terrible comparisons", each to his own, but here are links to the relevant FEMA pages in the order you list them:

www.fema.gov

www.fema.gov

www.fema.gov

www.fema.gov

To paraphrase Einstein, rebuilding the same property over and over and expecting it to survive repeated natural disasters is stupid ( a very loose paraphrasing I acknowledge ) and there should be measures to limit aid to individuals who do this. But this is not the majority of disaster victims and legislating against the needy because of the stupid is not a policy to which I subscribe.

#12 | Posted by Foreigner at 2019-09-29 02:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh my God!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Swim for it, the oceans are swallowing us up.

#13 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-09-29 02:47 PM | Reply

#2 | Posted by nullifidian

The INTENT of the Federal Flood Insurance Program was to "buyout" people not to rebuild them. The problem is that it was privatized - being handed off to private for profit insurance companies to manage. If it had been used as intended we wouldn't have anyone living in these zones today - and conservatives crying foul I am sure...

#14 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-09-29 02:47 PM | Reply

If federal assistance for one type of weather/climate/natural disaster related risk is to be denied, it should be denied to all such risks.

Ummmm no. For many reasons.

Besides, is there a comparable program to the federal flood insurance program for things other than flooding that you list?

If not, then the consistency would be doing away with the flood insurance program.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-29 03:38 PM | Reply

In Florida's Keys, 13 million people who will have to migrate inland due to rising sea levels

Mass migration begins as coastal homes are bulldozed...

Null: Good. I've been saying this for years.

Do you and other folks understand that actual migration started already and that you've been whining about the results? Time to say it once again, because it's only going to get worse and we need real, workable policies; Central America's choice: Pray for rain or migrate.

The Keys' issue is a First World issue. Easy choice.

Central America? Those trying to get into the United States are doing it because the choice is do it or starve to death.

All this has been laid out by the Pentagon - and has been posted on this site repeatedly over the years.

#16 | Posted by YAV at 2019-09-29 04:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The topic on this thread is Florida and southeast coastal flood plains. Not central America. That's just a deflection.

#17 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 04:19 PM | Reply

The US Census population estimate for 2014 is 77,136. The city of Key West is the county seat of Monroe County. The county consists of a section on the mainland which is almost entirely in Everglades National Park, and the Keys islands from Key Largo to the Dry Tortugas.
Population: 73,090 (2010)
State: Florida
Area: 356 km2 (137 sq mi)
Location: Florida Straits
Florida Keys - Wikipedia

#18 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-29 04:23 PM | Reply

Elucidate, please.

#19 | Posted by YAV at 2019-09-29 04:26 PM | Reply

If she wants out so bad, I would definitely entertain picking up her mortgage. We're looking in that area anyway.

Rcade...start a climate refugee real-estate thread.

#20 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2019-09-29 04:55 PM | Reply

#15 - Are you suggesting that FEMA does not provide funding support for disasters other than flooding? Simply click on any of the links I previously provided and select a listed event. Chances are it will show the amount of financial support FEMA provided. Here's an example:

www.fema.gov

This lists $88.2m of individual and household funding as having been provided for a fire event. It seems inherently unlikely that much of this was provided under the flood insurance program, so to address your first point, clearly there are mechanisms for FEMA to provide federal assistance outside of flood insurance, even if, as I readily admit, I do not know what they are called.

Sometimes I find it necessary to cycle back to why I posted a comment, or risk getting off topic and inadvertently defending something I don't actually believe.

The point with which I originally took issue was this " We should abolish all incentives for people to live in flood-prone areas, like the federal flood insurance program". My objection was that there is nowhere in the US which is free of natural disaster threats, so if you promoted this idea, you should accept that any type of federal funding which compensated or assisted victims after an event should be eliminated, because it provides a similar incentive to live in risk prone areas. I provided links to FEMA to show that indeed, many more disaster types than flooding are addressed by this federal agency.

To address your last point, the consistency is therefore not "doing away with the flood insurance program" but doing away with all federal funding programs, however structured, that provide " incentives for people to live in" natural disaster risk zones.

For the avoidance of doubt, this is not a position I hold.

#21 | Posted by Foreigner at 2019-09-29 05:02 PM | Reply

--I provided links to FEMA to show that indeed, many more disaster types than flooding are addressed by this federal agency.

Fema shouldn't be involved in any in-state issues. The states can deal with it. We in California can deal with wildfires. Have a lot of experience and a lot of money. No need for Fema.

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 05:15 PM | Reply

Worried about Miami, etc., well the Netherlands has dealt with such a situation for centuries, but I guess modern day America is incapable of doidng the same, according to the global warming/climate change theorists who believe the seas will rise.

"----- are man-made structures that defend against natural forces like water, climate and altitude and are mostly constructed of material found on site. Over the centuries, the Netherlands had frequently been flooding, from the rivers as well as the sea in varying degrees and severity."

#23 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-29 05:42 PM | Reply

Worried about Miami, etc., well the Netherlands has dealt with such a situation for centuries ...

There's no inland area in Florida to divert the water to like they have in Holland. That part of Florida is a peninsula with ocean and Gulf on both sides. It's coast and then the Everglades just a few miles inland, which is already water soaked.

#24 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 05:46 PM | Reply

We in California can deal with wildfires. Have a lot of experience and a lot of money. No need for Fema.

#22 | POSTED BYNULLIFIDIAN

California has money?

I thought California was broke?

Which is it?

#25 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-29 05:54 PM | Reply

--There's no inland area in Florida to divert the water to like they have in Holland.

Then the obvious solution is to move. Problem solved.

#26 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 05:56 PM | Reply

Oh my God!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Swim for it, the oceans are swallowing us up.

#13 | POSTED BYSNIPER

ZOMG!

Hi Sniper!

#27 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-29 05:57 PM | Reply

" We should abolish all incentives for people to live in flood-prone areas, like the federal flood insurance program".

If your roof is damaged by a storm, and the rain damages the inside of your house, your insurer may deny coverage for the damage water causes inside the house. Some do. Check your policy. If there are limitations, flood insurance is a must to replace floors, carpet, and furniture.

#28 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 06:08 PM | Reply

"If your roof is damaged by a storm, and the rain damages the inside of your house, your insurer may deny coverage for the damage water causes inside the house. Some do. Check your policy. If there are limitations, flood insurance is a must to replace floors, carpet, and furniture.

POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY"

Most insurance policies make a distinction between rising and falling water. They most likely protect against falling water. Indeed if you have a mortgage, they mortgage company will demand such coverage.

However to protect against rising water requires a rider, and usually an expensive one since most people seeking such policies live in flood prone areas. It is not up the the government (taxpayers) to provide such policies.

#29 | Posted by goatman at 2019-09-29 06:13 PM | Reply

--If there are limitations, flood insurance is a must to replace floors, carpet, and furniture.

Homeowners are free to purchase private flood insurance. If they can't afford it, they should live elsewhere. Problem solved.

#30 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 06:16 PM | Reply

There's no inland area in Florida to divert the water to like they have in Holland. That part of Florida is a peninsula with ocean and Gulf on both sides. It's coast and then the Everglades just a few miles inland, which is already water soaked.

#24 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY AT 2019-09-29 05:46 PM | FLAG: Your 'argument' does not hold water ; )

From flood control in the Netherlands - WiKi

'Flood control is an important issue for the Netherlands, as due to its low elevation , approximately two thirds of its area is vulnerable to flooding, while the country is densely populated. ... By 1250 most ----- had been connected into a continuous sea defense. The next step was to move the ----- ever-more seawards.'

#31 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-29 06:39 PM | Reply

Last time we were home shopping we nearly bought a house here in Nashville with 7 acres, horse barn, 3000 sq ft house in a really nice part of town. But we ended up buying a different one that also had some acreage around it, and sits on a small rise.

During the home hunt I did some research and discovered the house on 7 acres that we didn't buy sat on a 100 year flood plain. A flood every 100 years. Not to worry, right? Well, when the '100 year flood' hit in 2010, water was over the roof of that house. We felt incredibly fortunate we bought where we did.

#32 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 06:41 PM | Reply

A flood every 100 years. Not to worry, right?

We've had 3 of those here in the last 20 years.

#33 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-09-29 06:44 PM | Reply

--There's no inland area in Florida to divert the water to like they have in Holland.

Then the obvious solution is to move. Problem solved.

#26 | Posted by nullifidian

MSGT was talking about building ----- and dams.

With the Everglades consuming the vast majority of land mass in South Florida, already water saturated, that won't work in South Florida.

#34 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 06:45 PM | Reply

--that won't work in South Florida.

Moving works.

#35 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 06:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

MSGT

Holland has 270 miles of coastline. We have 12,000 miles of coastline the U.S., with the heavy concentrations of people living near the coasts and many many times the number of people.

Also, Holland has entire systems in place to deal with it. We don't. Holland believes in climate change and sees it happening in real time. They're raising buildings and taking other measures. We have climate deniers and no plan to deal with rising sea levels.

Luckily, America has a lot of 'higher ground.' In 100 years, the U.S. coast may return to the wetlands they were before developers moved in, and inland states will see huge growths in their populations.

#36 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:00 PM | Reply

-- We have climate deniers

Define "climate denier."

#37 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 07:04 PM | Reply

NULLI

You live in SoCal. The rest of the country gets storms with rain and winds and tornadoes and hurricanes.

My point, which you glossed over, was that flood insurance is oftentimes the only insurance that will cover replacement/repair for water damage caused by storms.

Our insurer covers those losses should they occur, but many policies do not, and people don't realize it until it's too late.

#38 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:07 PM | Reply

And, yes, people can buy private flood insurance rather than NFIP ...

But I'd bet, for the reason stated, most people never think they'll need either

#39 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:10 PM | Reply

They think they're covered under their homeowner's insurance ...

#40 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:11 PM | Reply

Perhaps you haven't read about the homeowners whose homes have been damaged in hurricanes where the water was from rain, not flooding, and who were denied coverage by their insurers for repair/replacement inside their homes.

There have been countless stories in the news over the years about just that ...

#41 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:13 PM | Reply

--They think they're covered under their homeowner's insurance ...

They should read their policies. How is that any concern of tax payers in other states?

#42 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 07:15 PM | Reply

"Perhaps you haven't read about the homeowners whose homes have been damaged in hurricanes where the water was from rain, not flooding, and who were denied coverage by their insurers for repair/replacement inside their homes.
There have been countless stories in the news over the years about just that ...

#41 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY "

Then they didn't buy enough insurance. If they had a mortgage, they HAD to have had the proper insurance or they would not get the loan. If an insurance company refuses to pay a valid claim on a policy, the mortgage company will most definitely go after them.

If there is no mortgage then it's caveat emptor when it comes to buying insurance.

#43 | Posted by goatman at 2019-09-29 07:33 PM | Reply

--They think they're covered under their homeowner's insurance ...

They should read their policies. How is that any concern of tax payers in other states?

#42 | Posted by nullifidian

NFIP isn't funded from your taxes. The only time Treasury funds are put into the program is when there has been a catastrophic disaster, like when Katrina, Sandy, and Rita all hit in a short amount of time. Money borrowed for temporary shortfalls is paid back to the Treasury.

Most homeowner policies don't cover earthquakes, which are your primary concern. Do you or your landlord carry it? Only 10% of Californians do. It can cost up to $5000 a year for a 1400 sq ft home.

#44 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:38 PM | Reply

Mortgage companies may require flood insurance for houses built on flood plains but they DO NOT require homeowners to carry flood insurance as a general rule elsewhere.

I'll bet a lot of Houstonians have learned this the hard way.

And there have been numerous accounts of homeowner insurance companies denying coverage inside the house after a hurricane, stating that that damage was caused by 'flooding' after the roof blew off. Ya, a dick move, but some companies did it.

#45 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-29 07:58 PM | Reply

-- We have climate deniers
Define "climate denier."

#37 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

#46 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 08:00 PM | Reply

"Mortgage companies may require flood insurance for houses built on flood plains but they DO NOT require homeowners to carry flood insurance as a general rule elsewhere.
#45 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY"

Federally insured or regulated home loans, like FHA or VA loans do require it. It's optional for other non government affiliated loans.

#47 | Posted by goatman at 2019-09-29 08:07 PM | Reply

A climate denier is someone who says that nothing is changing and even if it is it's no big deal.

#48 | Posted by Zed at 2019-09-29 08:09 PM | Reply

#48 Tropical Depression Zed is forming in the midwest.

#49 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-09-29 08:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Worthless definition by Zed. Next.

#50 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 08:44 PM | Reply

I see Sarvis has reemerged from his hideout under Hillary's moo moo.

It must mean she's running again.

#51 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-09-29 08:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I see Sarvis has reemerged from his hideout under Hillary's moo moo.

It must mean she's running again.

#51 | POSTED BYSHEEPLESCHISM

Hey, good catch, I didn't see that.

And if Hillary runs again, Bernie needs to immediately start a 3rd political party and bring Tulsi and Yang with him ...

Doing so would immediately splinter the Democratic Party while peeling off all those white working-class Trump voters who would've went for Bernie in 2016 if given the chance.

#52 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-29 09:16 PM | Reply

"Doing so would immediately splinter the Democratic Party while peeling off all those white working-class Trump voters who would've went for Bernie in 2016 if given the chance.

#52 | POSTED BY PINCHALOAF "

Hillary has exactly 0% chance of getting to the White House without an invitation to a "has been losers" convention for two reasons:

1) The DNC isn't stupid enough to make that mistake again. (I think they aren't anyway)
2) Hillary

#53 | Posted by goatman at 2019-09-29 09:28 PM | Reply

To address your last point, the consistency is therefore not "doing away with the flood insurance program" but doing away with all federal funding programs, however structured, that provide " incentives for people to live in" natural disaster risk zones.

I guess I see a clear difference between building a house in tornado alley, where a tornado might be, at most, 2-3 miles wide and a dozen miles long compared to hundreds of acres of Mississippi river lands that are supposed to flood regularly but are kept "dry" by levees and pumps.

In one case, you've built in an area that has high risk for a disaster as a region but low risk for a given place. In the other, you're attempting to shape the land and control something that's been a critical process for that land for eons.

#54 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-29 10:33 PM | Reply

Worthless definition by Zed. Next.

#50 | Posted by nullifidian

No...he was spot on.

#55 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-29 10:33 PM | Reply

Someone tell Obama before he closes on his $15m seaside property because he is obviously clueless...well,or he doesn't believe this climate nonsense.

#56 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-09-29 10:37 PM | Reply

Someone tell Obama before he closes on his $15m seaside property because he is obviously clueless...

President Obama is buying a $15M seaside property in Florida? I thought he was smarter than that.

#57 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-09-29 10:44 PM | Reply

Climate change deniers have lemming syndrome... climate change to them is just one more cliff to jump off.

#58 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-09-29 10:45 PM | Reply

--Climate change deniers

What's that?

#59 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-29 10:50 PM | Reply

What's that?

#59 | Posted by nullifidian

Asked and answered.

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-29 10:57 PM | Reply

President Obama is buying a $15M seaside property in Florida? I thought he was smarter than that.
#57 | POSTED BY REDIAL

The ocean is ONLY rising in Florida? This ---- is getting serious now! I was always told water seeks to level itself,now because of Trump he has caused it to concentrate the rise to Florida. Impeach!!!!

#61 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-09-29 11:03 PM | Reply

The ocean is ONLY rising in Florida?

No, but this thread is about Florida. Specifically the Keys. I expect the issue is ground level vs. sea level.

#62 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-09-29 11:08 PM | Reply

Martha's Vineyard.
Pulled the address, then went to the maps for projected sea rise.
Looks like the property will be in trouble in 2100 for high tides.
I'd recommend enjoying it while they can, then having their kids sell it.

#63 | Posted by YAV at 2019-09-29 11:21 PM | Reply

Oh dear. Null's going to be upset that I posted that, even though I wasn't the one that brought up something "off topic."

#64 | Posted by YAV at 2019-09-29 11:22 PM | Reply

No, but this thread is about Florida. Specifically the Keys. I expect the issue is ground level vs. sea level.

Not to mention not every coast is the same and it's typical Ira-level stupidity to assume so.

#65 | Posted by jpw at 2019-09-30 12:10 AM | Reply

Holland believes in climate change and sees it happening in real time. They're raising buildings and taking other measures. We have climate deniers and no plan to deal with rising sea levels.

American[dis]Unity: Really? I get the impression that when they started centuries ago the concept never existed. Try harder please.

#66 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-30 01:13 AM | Reply

I remember after the double whammy, Katrina and Wilma, many Key Biscayners wanted to sell. Later on, when I moved there, we survived over a decade without a hit. I think these tendecies come and go.

#67 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2019-09-30 04:58 AM | Reply

Lori Rittel is stuck in her Florida Keys home, living in the wreckage left by Hurricane Irma two years ago, unable to rebuild or repair.
Hurricane's are not signs of Climate Exodus. How many houses in the keys are under / being lost because of rising sea levels? Melting glaciers...

#68 | Posted by homerj at 2019-09-30 07:08 PM | Reply

There should be single payer for homeowners. No one should go bankrupt just because of any pre existing conditions. Everyone should have to pay in, regardless whether they need it. You never know when you'll find yourself buying a house.

#69 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-09-30 08:29 PM | Reply

Do not worry as will be visiting here to see old friends come November. I'll let you know how awash the those little isles are.

#70 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-09-30 10:12 PM | Reply

Why should they be bailed out?

#71 | Posted by fresno500 at 2019-10-01 12:21 AM | Reply

Good. I've been saying this for years. We should abolish all incentives for people to live in flood-prone areas, like the federal flood insurance program Additionally, a moratorium on new construction should be imposed, and a climate property tax in these areas to pay for future emergencies.

#2 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2019-09-29 10:24 AM | FLAG: | NEWSWORTHY 2

I always wondered why they couldn't simply build better homes and infrastructure. Most of the problem seems to be planning and preparing.

#72 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-10-01 09:27 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort