• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Flood insurance in Western NC? Nope, but not surprising.

dseag2

DP Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2023
Messages
5,843
Reaction score
11,669
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I saw a news story where a guy from a small town in Western NC said he had been assessed at a 1% chance of flooding and yet he was flooded out by Hurricane Helene. One town had 4 million residents and only a little over 100k had flood insurance. Who could have ever imagined that a hurricane headed for the coast could flood towns in the mountains?

It just makes me wonder how many of the residents and businesses in these hard hit areas will be able to rebuild. Also, should the rest of us be thinking about how we are insured?

We are really far from the coast in Dallas but we've seen storms that have flooded adjacent areas. We live within walking distance of a major lake and the spillway breached in 2006. Does climate change mean it is time to think differently about the possibility of natural disasters in our various neighborhoods?

In Western NC, a lack of flood insurance deepens the damage | Opinion

In high elevations, flooding seemed a remote risk. Climate change has made it more likely.
www.yahoo.com
 
I think it definitely will, but with more focus on already compromised areas that may see an increase to what they already experience. What happened with Helene in NC is not common of an occurrence to start thinking of it in those terms, but it's hard to say what the new normal will be in how hurricanes track given their stronger intensity and ocean temperatures that keep them strong before hitting land.
 
I lived through many hurricanes when I lived in Florida, but the winds were the most damaging aspect (think Hurricane Andrew 1992). These days it seems that flooding is the most damaging aspect due to the increase in moisture carried by the storms. Perhaps this is because more homes are built to "hurricane code" to withstand stronger winds but that still doesn't account for flooding. I think we are living in unprecedented times when it comes to storms.
 

Welcome to the natural disasters as a result of human-induced global warming/climate change. Get used to it. Unfortunately.
 
I know what you mean. I'm not in a flood zone, but less than 20 miles away people along creeks and the Chattahoochee river are always at risk. No one is really safe.
 
You can buy federal flood insurance no matter where you live. I suggest it. The lower the risk, the lower the premium. Even if you live in the desert, you can be hit with flash flooding. In some areas, the rates are less than $100 per year.
 
We're at a point at which insurance needs to become a more public and automatic thing.
 
Because it has happened before and will happen again.
The Great Flood of 1916

The Great Flood​

Within a week-long period in July of 1916, two back-to-back hurricanes dropped more than 26 inches of rain over western North Carolina, leaving most of the region inundated and its riverways overflowing.
Click to expand...
Flood insurance is expensive if your risk is low, For example Mine was $800 a year with almost zero risk,
yet people near the cost who had flooded many times were subsidized to pay $300 a year.
It's tragic, but people build in areas known to have flooded in the past.
 
Helix said:
We're at a point at which insurance needs to become a more public and automatic thing.
Click to expand...
We already have enough socialism.

People need to just stop building in areas of danger, unless they can afford to.
 
Lord of Planar said:
We already have enough socialism.

People need to just stop building in areas of danger, unless they can afford to.
Click to expand...
Tell that to those who can't afford flood insurance. Since I care about the safety of everyone, I'd recommend that you not do it in person, though.
 
Helix said:
Tell that to those who can't afford flood insurance. Since I care about the safety of everyone, I'd recommend that you not do it in person, though.
Click to expand...
Then they should live somewhere else.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Then they should live somewhere else.
Click to expand...

What a truly ridiculous comment. Nobody could have predicted that a hurricane would have such enhanced intensity that it would cause widespread flood devastation in a community hundreds of miles inland. Your simplistic commentary does nothing more than cause embarrassment to you and to lessen your already minimal credibility.
 
Kblaster49 said:
You can buy federal flood insurance no matter where you live. I suggest it. The lower the risk, the lower the premium. Even if you live in the desert, you can be hit with flash flooding. In some areas, the rates are less than $100 per year.
Click to expand...
For now.

Project 2025 would end National Flood insurance programs and leave everyone at the whim of private insurers.

And we are watching the propaganda machine spin around that topic currently.
 
All that was needed is the levels of precipitation, which are not outside of historical numbers.
 
BirdinHand said:
For now.

Project 2025 would end National Flood insurance programs and leave everyone at the whim of private insurers.

And we are watching the propaganda machine spin around that topic currently.
Click to expand...
Does Aganda 47 do that?

You didn't get the memo. Did you. Project 2025 was never going to become a reality. Trump already has Agenda 47.

Are those lies still circling the left corners of the internet?
 
Helix said:
I'd recommend that you don't say that in person, either.
Click to expand...
There is risk in life. Period. There are areas more hazardous than others regarding natural disasters. Anytime you are boxed on a canyon, there are more risks than normal. Living on the sea, there are more risks than normal.
 
Lord of Planar said:
There is risk in life. Period. There are areas more hazardous than others regarding natural disasters. Anytime you are boxed on a canyon, there are more risks than normal. Living on the sea, there are more risks than normal.
Click to expand...
You don't have to take my advice. It's up to you.
 
Lord of Planar said:
There is risk in life. Period. There are areas more hazardous than others regarding natural disasters. Anytime you are boxed on a canyon, there are more risks than normal. Living on the sea, there are more risks than normal.
Click to expand...
True, there is risk in life.
What do you believe is the proper role of government (any level) when a natural disaster strikes like Hurricane Helene?
 
mike2810 said:
True, there is risk in life.
What do you believe is the proper role of government (any level) when a natural disaster strikes like Hurricane Helene?
Click to expand...
Save peoples lives and provide sustenance.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Save peoples lives and provide sustenance.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. I can agree that would be top priority. I would add temporary shelter.

How would you like to see the infrastructure repairs be done?
imo, damage in small towns may exceed what the town can afford to take care of.
It will also be interesting to see how utilities can afford to rebuild/repair the damage without going bankrupt.
 
mike2810 said:
Thanks for the reply. I can agree that would be top priority. I would add temporary shelter.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
mike2810 said:
How would you like to see the infrastructure repairs be done?
Click to expand...
By the owner.

If I have a lightning bolt strike my home, and it burns down, is the government going to replace it? At the individual level, nobody should get favoritism just because it was a mass event. At the individual level, it affects the family no different that the lightning strike would.
mike2810 said:
imo, damage in small towns may exceed what the town can afford to take care of.
Click to expand...
That's why we have government agencies like FEMA.
mike2810 said:
It will also be interesting to see how utilities can afford to rebuild/repair the damage without going bankrupt.
Click to expand...
The same as anyone else.

Our government is now already on an endless spiral of spending doom. We cannot tax out way out. We need to spend less.
 
watsup said:
Spend less on what?
Click to expand...
Set a path for the future to get people off of social programs. This is our largest spending. Getting rid of illegal aliens would help. Make businesses only employ legal workers. When they cannot find workers at the wages offered, they have to increase the wages until they can.
 
Lord of Planar said:
We already have enough socialism.

People need to just stop building in areas of danger, unless they can afford to.
Click to expand...
Don't have kids unless you can afford to. Don't buy a house unless you can afford to. Don't live anywhere natural disasters can possibly happen unless you can afford to. Don't go to college unless you can afford to. Maybe socialism isn't the problem. Maybe the problem is actually found in the system that creates so many people that can't afford these things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…