In recent weeks there has been a lot of flooding here in Appalachia. Lives and homes have been lost, all of which is very tragic.
Unfortunately, there are still a lot of uninsured homes in that number. They live near a creek that has undoubtedly flooded before (some of them have been hit twice this summer) but they won't move or insure, and every time they have a loss they're wanting a handout from FEMA.
What message does this send? "You're high risk, so don't insure. We'll pay for it."
And would we have had $200 million in the FIRE Act if this kind of thing weren't going on nationwide?
Should FEMA stipulate some level of effort from people before they get help? (Regardless, these are my personal opinions.)
Unfortunately, there are still a lot of uninsured homes in that number. They live near a creek that has undoubtedly flooded before (some of them have been hit twice this summer) but they won't move or insure, and every time they have a loss they're wanting a handout from FEMA.
What message does this send? "You're high risk, so don't insure. We'll pay for it."
And would we have had $200 million in the FIRE Act if this kind of thing weren't going on nationwide?
Should FEMA stipulate some level of effort from people before they get help? (Regardless, these are my personal opinions.)
Comment