Why did insurance companies pull out of California right before the wild fires?

[Revelation]

It absolutely is climate change. You can have your head in the sand about this, but its actually what the insurance industry is discussing, which has led to some companies exiting states most affected, including California, Florida and Louisiana. Also at risk will be Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Nevada and Arizona, all states that are expected to be most impacted by the consequences of global warming.

Financial Services

Explore Deloitte’s insights and solutions for the banking & capital markets, insurance, and investment management sectors.

www2.deloitte.com

The uninsurable world: how the insurance industry fell behind on climate change

Surge in floods and fires has caught out the insurance industry and added an ‘uncertainty factor’ to premiums

www.ft.com

Climate Change and Its Undeniable Impact on Insurance: How To Respond? | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Climate change will interfere with insurers’ risk predictions and pricing policies. They may need to work with clients on new types of coverage, apply novel technology and collaborate with governments and other entities.

www.skadden.com

The Florida insurance crisis: Why are insurance companies leaving Florida?

The Florida insurance crisis is worsening as home insurance companies leave the state, while those that stay raise rates. Find out what's causing the Florida insurance crisis and what you can do.

www.insurance.com

How insurance can help combat climate change

In the transition to a green economy, firms can play a critical role in helping the insurance industry and climate change manage physical and transition risk.

www.mckinsey.com

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343523001598

You can stick your head in the sand and listen to "news" that lies to you so that you can soothe your inner-ostrich, but the people that are actually experts in the insurance business (see above) recognize climate change as a reality and a threat to the insurance industry. They are trying to steer the industry businesses accordingly.View attachment 67560125

It is BS that this is due to any climate change. Total nonsense libral pablum for the masses.

IMHO, the Cali fires go beyond just climate change. like the Hawaii fires i think they were helped along, especially the Hawaii fires the residents complained for years concerning the spraying of certain chemicals that exacerbated the wild fires.

even the boats out in the water were burning in Hawaii, that in itself is a smoking gun.

dig deep on these fires, the Fake media will not tell the truth. the Insurance companies know this and pulled out.


.

 

[Paradoxical]

What an incredibly weak retort, obvious to anyone reads this. There is no "failure to communicate". The only failures here are your weak understanding of the issue at hand, weak debate skills and, it seems, a degree of intellectual laziness, at least on this subject.

First, the topic at hand is "why are insurance companies leaving California".... to which there are numerous uninformed posts, including yours. When information is put together that actually addresses the issue at hand, people, including you can't deal with it because it stands contrary to your ill-informed world view, so we get really weak arguments as you have put forth.

Expert opinion is how the world works; its how debate works. No one is an expert in all things, so we rely on those that study a subject and live an issue. You can not have a court case, unless its in a TV court, without expert opinion. A court case is a formal debate. You have no expert opinion in your favor, and the other side does, you are generally going lose in court.

So you know, I never expect to convince the person I am engaging with, but I do enjoy taking their line of reasoning apart. If you think you have argued your point well here, you are deluded. You are defenseless on the subject because you have no facts, no experts or even much logic behind any of your thinking in this subject. On this matter, you are intellectually naked before all of us because you are just wrong.

Either stick to subjects you actually know something about, or learn how to back up your opinions with experts.

They are leaving because of regulations. Specifically, that California won't allow them to increase rates to be commensurate with risk. That and their consumer advocacy when it comes to property claims and the courts always siding with the insured.

 

[VanceMack]

They pulled out of California because although the state has ALWAYS had fire threats (brush, dry hot winds, long periods without significant rainfall, etc) the state has always managed their fire situation...until the last 5-10 years.

They pull out of Florida because hurricanes cant be predicted and no manner of government engagement will protect from them.

When an industry sees greater risk than reward, they close shop.

 

[Paradoxical]

They pulled out of California because although the state has ALWAYS had fire threats (brush, dry hot winds, long periods without significant rainfall, etc) the state has always managed their fire situation...until the last 5-10 years.

They pull out of Florida because hurricanes cant be predicted and no manner of government engagement will protect from them.

When an industry sees greater risk than reward, they close shop.

Exactly.

 

[Bodecea]

You guessed it: progressive regulation

Why did they pull out of Florida? Same reason?

 

[Bodecea]

Climate change.

Yes. Insurance companies believe in it....even if you don't.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Insurance company actuaries saw increased risk due to climate change.

 

[PNW Guy]

What we have here is failure to communicate.

Just because some group or person uses Global warming as an exuce as to why insurers are pulling out of states does not mean that it is true that any climate change has cause more brush fires or more severe brush fires, or more hurricanes or more severe hurricanes. You are attempting to use people "in authority" without having to prove what those people are alleging. This is what Christians do when they rely on pastors and priests to lead them by the nose.

But, pray tell, (pun intended) how may homes burned down or were flooded 200 years ago in areas where there were no homes?

More garbage propaganda from a scared shitless oligarchy type about to lose everything and it's hilarious! Are you Piggy Musk? If so just get the surgery, be the woman you are inside and stop raging yourself into an early grave and senility nearly as bad as your lover Mango's. I know you like poo poo play too Elo boy, but help is available if you want it, lol (IMO)

At least my post wasn't as silly or literally EVIL (IMO) now what tactic will you use to blame someone else for your problems and convince yourself you matter? The next post should be another epically convoluted denial of reality...(IMO)

 

[PNW Guy]

Yes. Insurance companies believe in it....even if you don't.

Oh he believes, he just wants what he "earned" to be his and your stuff you earned to also be his and for you to miss that he owns an insurance company or some actual evil he wishes wasn't but doesn't care as long as you stay blind to his theft...(IMO)

 

[PNW Guy]

IMHO...

Translation I know better but for some reason HAVE to believe in this or my whole worldview may topple, my very sanity DEPENDS on making up my own propaganda to fix the holes in my alt right fear porn sights of choice, cuz I used to be a real man and a vet, but now I'm old and soft... (IMO)

 

[Paradoxical]

Yes. Insurance companies believe in it....even if you don't.

What better way for an insurer to use as cover the billion-dollar money making canard of Global warming" to pull out of a state? That way the libs are silenced and turn around with their tails between their legs and go home. Their scheme of blaming capitalism just fell off the Empire State building. Their plan to picket that company and call for federal investigations and blocking traffic just went up in smoke faster than a house on fire in the middle of a forest.

 

[Dans La Lune]

You guessed it: progressive regulation

No, Capitalism.

 

[Paradoxical]

This OP should be used as a teaching lesson for all indoctrinated liberals here and used against them in any discussion of capitalism and government over-reach. I lived in California, so the libs here who live in New York or New Jersey and elsewhere don't know what the eff they are talking about.

This is really a story about how liberals ruin everything with the idealism of how things ought to be and to make it that way, all they need do is regulate and make companies conform. The Department of Insurance in California turned far left liberal about 15 years ago and extremely pro consumer taking a hard line on rate increases. This is like someone telling Ford or Chevy that you can only charge so much. IOW, bureaucrats deciding how a company runs its business instead of the marketplace.

I could go on, but this is why insurance companies are pulling out and using the excuse of "Global warming" instead. Now, if some idiots like Gavin Newsom decided that cars cost too much and told the auto companies, they can only charge X for their cars, how long do you think the car companies would pull out and say it's because of global warming, so they wouldn't have a group of maniacal indoctrinated librals torching their car dealerships?

 

[PNW Guy]

You're likely just scum with skeletonz punk.. That's obviouz as fux to anyone can see, or yer crazy... (IMO) DISS ****in' SMITHED!

Hit too close to home huh punk? (IMO) If you wanna impress us with a post why don't you splain why exactly Fauci is even and you'r e not just fonfused in three sentences please, no links? Can you?

 

[MauiMan]

You guessed it: progressive regulation

Nah, that's too simple. Insurance companies don't just pack up and leave over a little red tape. California's got wildfires, earthquakes, and skyrocketing costs those are the real kicks in the teeth. Regulation's just the scapegoat they trot out. What makes you think it's all about the rules anyway?

 

[gman]

The answer is very simple: THEY “WOKE”UP.

 

[rahl]

They are leaving because of regulations. Specifically, that California won't allow them to increase rates to be commensurate with risk. That and their consumer advocacy when it comes to property claims and the courts always siding with the insured.

California regulations are why insurers are pulling out of Florida, Louisiana, coastal areas of Texas, North Carolina and South Carolina?

 

[Deuce]

Climate change.

Certainly a contributor. Higher rates of droughts make these fires more common.

I know, you think you're being funny because you're on that right wing nonsense where you pretend the climate never changes. Or when convenient, you point out that climate has always changed and therefore nothing bad can happen.

It's just cute when right wingers are right by accident.

 

[Paradoxical]

California regulations are why insurers are pulling out of Florida, Louisiana, coastal areas of Texas, North Carolina and South Carolina?

My post was about California. But go ahead and do your research instead of relying on me to do it for you and you will find that even in the other states you mentioned that the regulations imposed on insurance companies which include stops on rate increases are also prevalent in those states. It would be like telling a construction firm who builds tract homes that he can no longer sell them for more than he sold similar homes for last year, even though the regulators required him to install solar heating, tile roofs, triple pane windows, concrete walls, sprinklers inside and on the roofs.

I have the proof. I don't post nonsense and lies like the Libs of DP. Unlike the Libs here and elsewhere I do my research.

Folks, what this demonstrates is why government doesn't work. It sets up committees and oversight and agencies and fills them with starry eyed clueless liberals who don't know jack about economics, capitalism or even insurance and those idiots regulate insurance companies and tell them they either can't increase rates, or only so much. Then, when companies lose money, the regulators keep their jobs even though the companies left that state.

 

[rahl]

My post was about California.

And you were corrected.

But go ahead and do your research instead of relying on me to do it for you and you will find that even in the other states you mentioned that the regulations imposed on insurance companies which include stops on rate increases are also prevalent in those states.

Why did republicans impose such regulations?

It would be like telling a construction firm who builds tract homes that he can no longer sell them for more than he sold similar homes for last year, even though the regulators required him to install solar heating, tile roofs, triple pane windows, concrete walls, sprinklers inside and on the roofs.

Nobody is telling them that.

I have the proof.

No you don’t. It’s why you can’t post it.

I don't post nonsense and lies like the Libs of DP.

Every post you make is full of unhinged and demonstrably false right wing nonsense.

Unlike the Libs here and elsewhere I do my research.

Folks, what this demonstrates is why government doesn't work. It sets up committees and oversight and agencies and fills them with starry eyed clueless liberals who don't know jack about economics, capitalism or even insurance and those idiots regulate insurance companies and tell them they either can't increase rates, or only so much.

Florida, Louisiana, Texas and North Carolina governments are full of of liberals?

Then, when companies lose money, the regulators keep their jobs even though the companies left that state.

We have already established it isn’t liberal regulations they have caused insurance companies to pull out of states.

 

[Paradoxical]

And you were corrected.

Why did republicans impose such regulations?

Nobody is telling them that.

No you don’t. It’s why you can’t post it.

Every post you make is full of unhinged and demonstrably false right wing nonsense.



Florida, Louisiana, Texas and North Carolina governments are full of of liberals?

We have already established it isn’t liberal regulations they have caused insurance companies to pull out of states.

Look it up. Are you familiar with Google search? Bing? Copilot? DuckDuckGo? There are classes online or email me if you need assistance. It matters not if a state is a red state or a blue state when they have other agencies that can regulate insurance companies. In every case including California and the states you listed the states regulate the rates and impose other regulations on insurers that have driven many out of those states.

I don't know how many times I have to correct you and what it takes but it is obvious to me that you are unwilling or unable to grasp what I have been teaching you. I tried to help. I really did. There was show one time where people could "call a friend" when they were lost. Maybe you could do that to find out the reason for the OP of why insurers pulled out of California. You dragged other states into it as a diversion and it turs out they are pulling out or reducing their exposures for the same reasons.

I understand that you may yearn for Big Government to work and possibly anti-capitalist, but what I am teaching you and everyone else here is that socialism, communism and Marxism as systems of government always fail and the insurance crisis CREATED by regulations amply demonstrates why.

 

[rahl]

Look it up.

No. Prove your argument.

Are you familiar with Google search? Bing? Copilot? DuckDuckGo? There are classes online or email me if you need assistance. It matters not if a state is a red state or a blue state when they have other agencies that can regulate insurance companies. In every case including California and the states you listed the states regulate the rates and impose other regulations on insurers that have driven many out of those states.

And as you’ve been shown, regulations are not why insurers are pulling out.

I don't know how many times I have to correct you and what it takes but it is obvious to me that you are unwilling or unable to grasp what I have been teaching you. I tried to help

But what you keep posting is demonstrably false, and you know it’s false.

. I really did. There was show one time where people could "call a friend" when they were lost. Maybe you could do that to find out the reason for the OP of why insurers pulled out of California. You dragged other states into it as a diversion and it turs out they are pulling out or reducing their exposures for the same reasons.

Yes. they pulled out because of extremely high risk due to climate change.

I understand that you may yearn for Big Government to work and possibly anti-capitalist, but what I am teaching you and everyone else here is that socialism, communism and Marxism as systems of government always fail and the insurance crisis CREATED by regulations amply demonstrates why.

But your position has been completely refuted.

 

[Paradoxical]

No. Prove your argument.

And as you’ve been shown, regulations are not why insurers are pulling out.

But what you keep posting is demonstrably false, and you know it’s false.

Yes. they pulled out because of extremely high risk due to climate change.

But your position has been completely refuted.

My query to Grok: What was the main reason that State Farm officials gave for pulling out of the California homeowners market?

The Real Reason State Farm Won’t Sell Home Insurance in California Anymore

“Climate shocks are making parts of America uninsurable,” the New York Times observed following State Farm’s announcement. While climate change might be in the zeitgeist, there are better explanations for State Farm’s exit.

fee.org

State Farm officials cited several key reasons for pulling out of the California homeowners market, with the primary focus being the financial unsustainability of continuing operations under the state's conditions. In their official statements, they highlighted "historic increases in construction costs outpacing inflation, rapidly growing catastrophe exposure, and a challenging reinsurance market" as the main drivers. These factors, combined with outdated insurance regulations in California—such as those stemming from Proposition 103, which limits their ability to adjust rates quickly to match rising risks—made it impossible for State Farm to maintain adequate claims-paying capacity while complying with financial solvency requirements. Essentially, the escalating costs and risks, particularly from wildfires, alongside restrictive pricing regulations, forced them to halt new policies and non-renew tens of thousands of existing ones to protect the company's financial health. This was explicitly outlined in their announcements, such as the May 2023 decision to stop accepting new applications and the March 2024 update on non-renewing 72,000 policies, where they emphasized the need to align insurance rates with actual risk—a flexibility they claimed California’s regulatory environment did not allow.

Do you see anything in the above that says State Farm officials pulled out because of climate change? You may see some claims of that by the usual suspects like the LA Times, WaPo, The NY Times and other clueless bloggers but the reason(s) are as I stated and as I bolded.

 

[rahl]

My query to Grok: What was the main reason that State Farm officials gave for pulling out of the California homeowners market?

The Real Reason State Farm Won’t Sell Home Insurance in California Anymore

“Climate shocks are making parts of America uninsurable,” the New York Times observed following State Farm’s announcement. While climate change might be in the zeitgeist, there are better explanations for State Farm’s exit.

fee.org

State Farm officials cited several key reasons for pulling out of the California homeowners market, with the primary focus being the financial unsustainability of continuing operations under the state's conditions. In their official statements, they highlighted "historic increases in construction costs outpacing inflation, rapidly growing catastrophe exposure, and a challenging reinsurance market" as the main drivers. These factors, combined with outdated insurance regulations in California—such as those stemming from Proposition 103, which limits their ability to adjust rates quickly to match rising risks—made it impossible for State Farm to maintain adequate claims-paying capacity while complying with financial solvency requirements. Essentially, the escalating costs and risks, particularly from wildfires, alongside restrictive pricing regulations, forced them to halt new policies and non-renew tens of thousands of existing ones to protect the company's financial health. This was explicitly outlined in their announcements, such as the May 2023 decision to stop accepting new applications and the March 2024 update on non-renewing 72,000 policies, where they emphasized the need to align insurance rates with actual risk—a flexibility they claimed California’s regulatory environment did not allow.

FEE.org

Do you see anything in the above that says State Farm officials pulled out because of climate change? You may see some claims of that by the usual suspects like the LA Times, WaPo, The NY Times and other clueless bloggers but the reason(s) are as I stated and as I bolded.

Refuted this already.

 

[vesper]

Why did insurance companies pull out of California right before the wild fires?​

Simply because Insurance companies are not stupid. They are in the business to make a profit insuring risk. The lower the risk the more chance for profit. The higher the risk the more chance for loss.

Those companies were well-aware of both California's crazy water use (read waste) policies, as well as the high risk of annual fires in spring and summer. Especially when the State and local governments were not properly clearing dried brush and fallen timber in order to help prevent such fires. Add to that the improper maintenance of reservoirs, and it was a disaster waiting to happen.

Not only that, but California also put a cap on what insurance companies could charge for premiums.