Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

bondbuyer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 237 posts

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#171

Post by PM_me_your_math »

adrienthebo wrote: post #86
PM_me_your_math wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must say that is a terrible idea. Should parts of CA or other earthquake prone areas be labelled uninhabitable? What about areas where forest fires are routine? Flood prone areas? Tornado prone areas? High UV? Poor air quality? It makes no sense whatsoever to dictate that people cannot live on the coasts due to natural disasters which happen everywhere, all the time. Frankly, being told where to live is more garish…

> Should parts of CA or other earthquake prone areas be labelled uninhabitable? Major earthquakes happen an order of magnitude less frequently than major storms - but there's merit to reconsidering how much infrastructure we build right next to fault lines. So, possibly? > What about areas where forest fires are routine? Without appropriate fire breaks or building construction, possibly - if your house and property i…

Who gets to defines the risk?

Does it matter if a place gets a powerful earthquake every 5 years or 20 years?

The entire premise of the suggestion is simply nonsense.

>It makes even less sense to build in areas that are all but guaranteed to be destroyed several times per century.

More people are killed in high crime areas than in storm prone areas, and they are killed daily.

Do we tell people they can't live there, either?

If you don't take any risk then you are not really living.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#172

Post by cycrutchfield »

thehappypm wrote: post #150
bigmattystyles wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they were lawful asylum seekers.

This kind of feels like doublespeak. Most migrants come for work, not to escape persecution. Economic migrants use asylum as a way to avoid being deported.

From a legal standpoint that is irrelevant. Until their asylum case is adjudicated, they are here legally.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#173

Post by Kon-Peki »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #24
digitalsushi wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone even get (good) insurance in Florida at this point? I believe many large insurance providers have backed out of Florida over the past few years by making their rates so astronomical that there's only one obvious goal.

Kin Insurance covers my Florida property at ~$400k of replacement coverage with reasonable deductibles for $1800/year. I am not on the water, the property is significantly above sea level with a new roof, and I have done every mitigation recommended by the insurer (wall to roof strapping, water barrier between shingles and decking, shutter supports, etc).

That sounds affordable as long as you have a decent job.

As a point of comparison, however, up here in northern Illinois, you can get 2-3x the replacement coverage from a name-brand national insurance company for that price. And we do have tornado risk.

Which is to say that your insurance is expensive, but I wouldn't call it a barrier to living there. Much like property taxes - if you saw my bill, you'd probably fall out of your chair. Turns out the total cost is high everywhere. ;)

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#174

Post by notch656a »

Lammy wrote: post #159
throwaway-blaze wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal immigrants? The feds flew or bused illegal border crossers who were processed and released to many states, including Florida. Yes it was a political stunt to move them again, but how is it worse than what the feds are doing?

Sad how we ended up in a world where capital is the only thing that gets the right to travel the globe freely. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030681-000-the-trut... “The passport as an instrument of state regulation was born of the French revolution of 1789. At first, ordinary people were issued passes to control internal movement, especially to Paris. But after the king tried to escape, and foreign aristoc…

I wonder how much public benefits has to do with strict immigration control. Before 1914 public benefits were practically nil, so it's not like you were likely to become a public charge as an immigrant. US seems to have 'solved' this by tolerating illegal immigration but then giving them the boot if the wheel ever squeaks.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#175

Post by Kon-Peki »

thehappypm wrote: post #160
giantg2 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the aquifer issue in the gear plains. At least FL has desalination as an option.

Florida gets tons of rain. This should be solvable without desal

They need Bermuda-style roofs. The water quality would probably go up, too.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#176

Post by cycrutchfield »

peterangular wrote: post #154
cycrutchfield wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are asylum seekers, what is illegal about that?

God the fact this comment keeps going gray really bothers me. You're 100% correct and these people are acting lawfully. I get that HN often swings conservative, but I gotta believe if we were in these folk's shoes some of us would be seeking a better life for ourselves through asylum in America.

Some people respond to inconvenient facts with downvotes.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#177

Post by btmiller »

rory wrote: post #142
cpurdy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, 1000x this. It is frustrating to be sending piles of money to these states every year, which they then waste on political stunts like flying legal immigrants to other states, instead of taking care of their citizens, or maybe investing in climate hardening. And then they're completely unprepared for cold weather, hot weather, wet weather, dry weather, ... and say things like "Nobody knew ___ could be so complica…

> flying legal immigrants to other states Can we please not do this flamewar thing? Asylum seekers are technically neither legal nor illegal immigrants yet, but everyone knows this will cause an argument that's completely unrelated to the article.

I think the relevance is that it’s solid evidence that: governments make bad decisions

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#178

Post by notch656a »

peterangular wrote: post #154
cycrutchfield wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are asylum seekers, what is illegal about that?

God the fact this comment keeps going gray really bothers me. You're 100% correct and these people are acting lawfully. I get that HN often swings conservative, but I gotta believe if we were in these folk's shoes some of us would be seeking a better life for ourselves through asylum in America.

I am for 100% open borders, I acknowledge asylum seekers are allowed in the country, and I agree your statement they are doing what many of us would do. I see nothing ethically wrong with what they're doing.

That said, anyone who doesn't understand the undertone here, that the great majority will be denied asylum, that a great number are claiming asylum in a way that is coached/contrived/embellished, or that they couldn't have stopped and claimed asylum in another nation along the way (such as Mexico) is just completely naive. A great number of poeple here are game the system. That's fine, whatever, fuck borders, I'm on board. But I'm gonna call a spade a spade. A great number are here to play the system, often with lies, and the idea that all these people are 'acting lawfully' is not only factually incorrect I assert you KNOW it is factually incorrect and use it here as propaganda. In fact it is not lawful to lie to federal authorities in your asylum claim, but many are doing it.

These are the things many of us know, but aren't supposed to say out loud in some polite circles.

I applaud their efforts, but I aint no fool.

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#179

Post by lotsofpulp »

jdhn wrote: post #145
ClassicOrgin wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was looking to move to Fort Myers or Fort Myers Shores with my girlfriend (she’s originally from there), and we looked at five different houses. Based on damage maps/satellite photos/Facebook posts all five of those houses were flooded. But, the problem is only two of them were in any sort of flood zones. The only reason we didn’t buy is because it looked like the market was tanking. I think there is a lot of blami…

It was a Cat 5 in all but name. Max winds were measured at 155 MPH, Cat 5 starts at 157 MPH wind speed.

So a cat 4 is a cat 5 in all but name? And a cat 5 is a cat 6 in all but name?

Re: Hurricane Ian damages in Southeast estimated at $100B to $120B

#180

Post by trynewideas »

michael1999 wrote: post #22
SoftTalker wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hurricanes are a fact of life in the gulf and southeastern atlantic coasts. There is no area that has not have been hit twice already in the past century. So all this coastline should be dunes and park spaces?

Calgary did this after the 2013 Bow river flood. They bailed out the homeowners. But if they choose to rebuild on those lots, next time they get zero. They are on their own. If catastrophic hurricanes are really going to happen every 10 years, should the federal government be subsidizing the coastal lifestyle and building you a new house each time? Consider: 100B/100M taxpayers = $1000 per person. Can you really say…

> Calgary did this after the 2013 Bow river flood. They bailed out the homeowners. But if they choose to rebuild on those lots, next time they get zero. They are on their own.

If you're talking about the town of High River/the Highwood River/the Beachwood estates and Wallaceville, it was about 102 houses out of 250 eligible and a couple hundred more affected. All but 14 lots were explicitly not up for development, at any risk; Beachwood and Wallaceville are being renaturalized as a floodplain and High River's removing infrastructure. The houses that weren't destroyed, demolished, or auctioned off to be moved are still there and uninhabited.[1]

Other damaged neighborhoods that were bought out got tossed around between provincial governments for eight years until High River bought them back for redevelopment.[2] There are regulations - the Floodway Development Regulation in particular - against developing floodways, but haven't been promulgated to prevent, or even disincentivize, development.[3][4] (If they had been, parts of Fort McMurray rebuilt after the 2016 wildfires that then flooded in 2020 wouldn't have been rebuilt in the first place.)[5]

The province also wouldn't fund buyouts of other flood-risk properties downstream of High River.[6] (Indeed, the High River bailout was OVERfunded, and High River sent money back to the county in January.)[7]

[1] https://www.highriveronline.com/articles/beachwood-naturaliz...

[2] https://www.highriveronline.com/articles/province-and-high-r...

[3] https://www.evabogdan.ca/uploads/8/1/4/0/81403352/bogdan_ben...

[4] https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/5da26123-e3df-45b8-a92...

[5] https://theconversation.com/fort-mcmurrays-flood-disaster-wa...

[6] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/foothills-county-floo...

[7] https://www.highriveronline.com/articles/high-river-excess-f...

Post reply on HN