[infecto]

I still don’t follow the logic but I would love to. If you have some specific ideas it would be great. Are you suggesting the government underwrites all risk no matter what? Are you suggesting to get rid of commercial insurance companies?

Perhaps the feel good statement comes off inflammatory but everything you said are nice ideas but lack how it actually get implemented. I am only suggesting that I am not sure having the government underwrite risk is a good idea, these funds are often underfunded and not underwriting the actual cost of loss correctly. It is funny because I don’t like the current constructs of health insurance in America but I think other forms of insurance work. On that side I think a form of a single payer system would work better, probably what you envision but not shared is like.

Again my point is simply that I think it can make sense for the government to underwrite if it requires moving those individuals out and not providing coverage to new homes that are in a flood zone. But I don’t think economically it works out going forward to just cover everything and anything.

[DoreenMichele]

But I don’t think economically it works out going forward to just cover everything and anything.

This is not a thing I ever suggested.

I have no idea why you are inferring that I did.

[infecto]

Then share your idea like I have with mine. You made multiple examples towards a fire departments and police forces. How else can anyone infer what you mean then? If you don’t want to share then just don’t but it is silly to respond by picking apart my statements alone.