Storm wrecked communities: Is the taxpayers responsibility to rebuild

See there you go assuming. I currently live just 2 miles from the San Andreas fault line and I have lived for the last 16 years within the san andreas fault zone. I did lose a home to erosion and earthquake damage. It was still there it was just rattled off of it's foundation and the engineers deemed the house unlivable. They tore down the house and we cannot rebuild on the location so say the surveyors so the property is now worth diddly, which is why I moved out here. I have been a renter ever since. I begrudge no one anything and I understand that many people who lie within the path of the storms are poor and have no choice but to go back But let's be honest here. Katrina was a 100 year storm as was Ivan supposedly and when hurricaines come roasring in they do not come roaring in from the land they come in fro the sea. Well I am sorry thaqt you too lost your home, due to the government not paying disabled people enough.(that is another of my soapbox issues.) However mon frere everyone knows that beachfront property and islands such as Galveston are considered premium real estate and it is the most expensive real estate that there is except in the mountain resorts of California. And for that matter homeowners have taken enough money directly out of my pocket. I sm a student who goes to college on student loans and Frannie May and Freddie Mac have bankrupted the Fannie May education trust so that even they along with al of the banks are not loaning any money to students so that they can finish their education. One of the reasons that they are citing for not returning the money to the educational trust; cleanup efforts form Ivan have userped the already userped tax payers educational trust fund. When I lost my property no one gave me squat, wxcept an orange notice on my door and a deputy telling me that I could take my stuff but that I had to get off of my own property because they deemed it unsafe. And now that the engineers and surveyors say that the land is too unstable to rebuild a house on the lot is worth, yep you guessed it. NOTHING! It's not even salable, total loss.

We've still got the infastructure when the storm passes. Infrastructure is piping under the streets, streets, electrical and communications calbling which is for the most part buried underground so when the storm passes the infrastructure remains there. When they go to Washington and they ask for federal aid they are asking for aid both for the cleanup of the debris and houses that are no longer sound, but allso for those who cannot afford to rebuildand with all of the money that we are putting out for the banks and the war I just don't think that we can afford to rebuild peoples houses for them when they choose not to pay their insurance and then lose their homes. Which I might add they are well aware when they buy the house that they are sitting in the danger zone.

Hmm, well u have ur valid point but trust me the people who is in trouble need help Take care

And that is precisely what they should do. The insurance companies are not playing fair with people and the federal government should step in and do something about that.

I highly doubt that the government will reprimand the insurance agencies. They get away with murder.

It is true, everyone snubs and sneers at uncle Sam until something happens then they go running to him palm outstretched wanting this and that and only a small proportion of the federal aide ever actually filters down to the people who actually need it and for whom application was made and approved.

I understand that for a lot of people there are affordability issues to leaving in evacuations and certainy in losing their omes and everything that they own, but whe they get disenfranchised by a hurricaine they are free to move and reestablish themselves elsewhere. I live in the Southern California desert and we have a large number of new residents who are Rita relocators because we don't get rain nor flooding in the Inland Empire. But should these peope expect help from the federal government due to an "act of God" which some insurance companies will not even pay for?

If they can't afford to relocate and they lose everything they have and have ever known, then yes, the government absolutely should step in and help them out. It's not easy to relocate and start your life over. If you don't have much money to begin with and that is what you have to do, then you have to look to your leaders and federal government for help. There are some that take advantage, but there are also those honest ones that genuinely need the help and should get it and sometimes don't. Not only have you lost your home and everything you own, but you have also lost your job. And we all know finding jobs nowadays is really hard to do. Sorry if I sound too defensive, but I have been through this. I lost my home and my job and all of my stability and had to start my life over and I can tell you, it's NOT easy. I didn't get any help from FEMA or anybody else so I had to do this all on my own. Three years later I am STILL getting on my feet. Then IKE comes along and destroys what is left of the property I had in Texas. Thank God we weren't there, but now I have abslolutely nothing of the place I once called home.

Very well stated!!!!!!BEST RESPONSE!!!!!!

Taxes pay for these things anyway and these people are taxpayers too. The engineers scratch their heads and theysay build xxx feet higha nd that ought to do it. But if our government would not take the complacent attitude that there is nothing that they can do to help these people to get insurance. Like forcing the insurance companies to insure these areas at reaqsonable rtes just as they insure other homs in the state, Make it so that if they don't insure the homes in the flood prone areas at moderately higher premiums of course and as the property in a flood zone is cheaper than property on higher ground the insurance premiums should not be as high as those for higher groud homes which cost twice as much. Let's just say it, the reaon that the insurance companies price the insurance out of reach of the homeowners in these areas is because they don't want to have to insure a house that they know is sooner or later going to have to file a claim because it is in a bad spot. Just like people who live or work on the banks of a big river. Rivers change their courses quite a lot unless of course you do what the city of LA did with the LA river and cement the path of the river into the land.

I feel the same way. Though I think that the insurance companies should be made to insure homeowners anywhere in the country. The premiums may be high but insurance is needed for when disaster strikes not if. Besides the insurance companies make millions a month just existing so they should be able to weather paying out on policies in heavy weather. Otherwise what is insurance for? For them to get rich off of us by only covering low risk areas?

Right here where I am now. Palm Spring California. It may be in the fault zsoe but huge earthquakes are very rare and we take our lumps like anyone else. But living in a low lying area close to the ocean is foolhardy if you cannot afford the insurance or to rebuild when disaster strikes. And the tax dollars to help American's rebuild their homes is really not my gripe. My gripe is that there are a lot of scammers in there and ordinary people who file clims with the feds for stuff tht either was not lost or did not even exist and this constitutes millions of the dollars in federal aid that are spent on such an area. Even regular nornmally honest people, when they see the chance to screw the government and therefore the people out of a few thousand dollars they figure where is the harm? There are millions of dollars in spurious claims which do not go to rebuilding the area but into some greedy homeowner's pocket for their living expenses. I complain constantly about the wasteful spending of our tax dollars, I write articles about it for associated content and helium hoping that I may help to wake some people up to the squandering of our resources on ridiculous things. As you said a lot of people down there are poor and cannot afford the insurance premiums. However would you drive a car that you couldn't afford to pay the insurance on? And if you did and you caused an accident what do you think would happen to you? You would be liable for your own damages to your vehicle and the damage to other vehicles tht you caused. No FEMA man is going to jump out of the bushes and give the uninsured motorist a dime. In fact they will fine you for the lack of insurance. If you cannot afford the insurance on the property that you live in because it is in the danger aone for flooding etcetera, that is your choice. You are more than able and welcone to sell your property and move slightly inland to higher ground are you not? These people were not without options far previous to ending up disinherited by the hurricaines. And conversely when the insurance companies won't insure you or won't insure you in the area that you live in, this is a hint that this is ot a good place to live. The real estate is also quite a bit cheaper here because of this. People live where they can afford to live this is true. And every one is affected sooner or later by "acts of God" no matter where they live, but even in the San Andreas fault zone just about everyone I know is insured against earthquake, fire, and flood, even renters. When you have a mortgage you have to insure your property anyway. Just like with a casr if you are paying on it you must have insurance. Which in California everyone must carry auto insurance also. We all juggle our finances to afford the things that we want to afford. These areas time and again must be rebuilt after storms. If people choose to remain in the lowlying flood prone areas along the coast that is a choice why snould they then look to me sitting high and dry in desert in California, to help them rebuild on the same spot that they just had their lives washed away from. There are a great number of places that have never had to file a claim with the government for catastrophic damages in every state. California does not just have earthquakes we have wildfires, flash floods, dust storms, and wind that bowls over tractor trailers around here all the time. But at what point do the homeowners have to take responsibility and liability for living in a place that they know is prone to this sort of periodic catastrophy?