archenemy Posted October 24, 2007 Author Share Posted October 24, 2007 I am not complaining about people being compensated after they were screwed by insurance companies. I am bitching about people WHO DONT GET INSURANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE and then expect the gov't to carry them. That's it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Many of the homes in south Florida have swimming pools too. Pretty common there for middle-income folk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I do think it would make more sense to shift much of cost from these extra insurance premiums to better construction for the environment that homes must withstand (and stronger regulation as to where a home can be built in the first place). This would result in folks paying for their risky location up front as part of the home price, rather than throwing their money away on something they'll never get back from insurance companies. It would also make them think twice about purchasing in such a location in the first place. "Oh, BTW, local code requires that your home be built on stilts. That'll be an extra $100,000, please." Actually, pole/pier foundations are often less expensive than conventional continuous-footing/stem-wall foundations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Post and pier foundations are a good thing to do if you're looking to preserve nearby trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Even better. 25' deep footings might cost extra, though, as would 12' posts and bracing able to withstand a hurricane's tidal surge. Edited October 25, 2007 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted October 25, 2007 Author Share Posted October 25, 2007 I do think it would make more sense to shift much of cost from these extra insurance premiums to better construction for the environment that homes must withstand (and stronger regulation as to where a home can be built in the first place). This would result in folks paying for their risky location up front as part of the home price, rather than throwing their money away on something they'll never get back from insurance companies. It would also make them think twice about purchasing in such a location in the first place. "Oh, BTW, local code requires that your home be built on stilts. That'll be an extra $100,000, please." Actually, pole/pier foundations are often less expensive than conventional continuous-footing/stem-wall foundations. My home is built on pier foundations even though I am above the 100 year flood plain. Good thing though, the place would probably rot or spall away with all the friggen rain up there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carolyn Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Not insurance related, but.. Im having a hard time feeling sorry for the people interviewed on the news who are distressed because they couldnt get all four of their cars out in time. Or the guy who quickly passed by his grandfathers desk that was 100yrs old (or somewhere around there), but was apparently very upset about his BIG screen TV that sat "right there in his living room", making sure to emphasize how big the TV was at least three times. Maybe Im a cold-hearted beoytch, but I feel more sorry for the poor cats and dogs that have lost their space and are now confined to their carriers or cages. Maybe even the little girl whose Hannah Banana doll is now gone. Then again, after the bridge collapse out here and seeing what was put on the news, I should know better about misquoting and dramatization in the wake of tragedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Not insurance related, but.. Im having a hard time feeling sorry for the people interviewed on the news who are distressed because they couldnt get all four of their cars out in time. Or the guy who quickly passed by his grandfathers desk that was 100yrs old (or somewhere around there), but was apparently very upset about his BIG screen TV that sat "right there in his living room", making sure to emphasize how big the TV was at least three times. Maybe Im a cold-hearted beoytch, but I feel more sorry for the poor cats and dogs that have lost their space and are now confined to their carriers or cages. Maybe even the little girl whose Hannah Banana doll is now gone. Then again, after the bridge collapse out here and seeing what was put on the news, I should know better about misquoting and dramatization in the wake of tragedy. YOU ARE ALL CRUEL AND HEARTLESS. WHERE IS THE COMPASSION?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.