The problem is mostly the existing homes. Things like flood zones have been increased in size. People rebuild on previous home sites, but code doesn't require those hardened techniques. You could build a house in a fire zone if you use the right materials and landscaping.
Insurance, homes, etc. are flows for the purposes of this analysis and so they aren't really that big a problem. Change the codes, so the stupid can't be recreated and it will handle itself as the old stuff is destroyed and not rebuilt/rebuilt in a way that can handle the reality of the situation with minimal insurance claim. Even if the rate of disaster doubles it's still an insurable problem in this setup and within 20-30 years the problem handles itself through natural aging out plus insurable destruction of the old stuff.
The key is to make it very easy to rebuild whatever you want within the constraint of new codes that ensure your building can handle its environment. If we let a california happen and hold everything up in development hell so almost nothing is being rebuilt six months to a year after the destruction is the real economy killer that is relevant here.
> First, insurance companies should be the last thing we consider when setting policy, this is propaganda for them trying to protect their racket, not anything more telling.
I was about to post the exact same quote. Along with the firing of the statistics chief, this kind of stuff is literally what the protagonist of 1984 did as his day job under the fictional regime.
> Rage Against the Machine[0] delivers it best & very fitting
Not really: this false equivalence between Democrats and GOP (especially their recent incarnation) is absolutely delusional. Contrast Obama, Trump 1.0, Biden, Trump 2.0 (so far). Like really?
With a few decades worth of hind sight, does anyone actually think that Gore would have handled 9/11 (leading into Afghanistan and Iraq) the same was as Bush (and Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz)? Even at the time (I'm a GenXer) it was strange thinking.
> Not really: this false equivalence between Democrats and GOP (especially their recent incarnation) is absolutely delusional.
You may be more interested in reading the lyrics than watching the video, the song is not about "equivalence between Democrats and GOP".
It's about the powerful who control the media and how the media is used to control the narrative. (some much worse than others) It's not only about <media bad>, but also how the American people (already with an insatiable searching for satisfaction in movies, glamour and tabloids) have become slaves to it [all media/types]; glaringly obvious today vs the 2000s as media heads have gained cult status in parts, to the point of earning government appointments only this cohort would be able to appoint and not get laughed out of office.
Those who control the narrative controls the present, who controls the past -- controls the future. To bring it full circle, fitting in that rewritting reports is controlling the narrative; similar to firing a messenger of statistics
I fully agree with you, it was strange thinking; and if we're drawing parallels -- interesting how real election scandals led to GOP presidents. [scotus/hanging chads & Mueller report]
Oh, and the "delivers it best" part is biased as I like Rage; they deliver the line better than reading it imo
There were predictions in the 2010s where some folks said QE wouldn't be a big deal, but others were giving dire warnings:
> We believe the Federal Reserve’s large-scale asset purchase plan (so-called “quantitative easing”) should be reconsidered and discontinued. We do not believe such a plan is necessary or advisable under current circumstances. The planned asset purchases risk currency debasement and inflation, and we do not think they will achieve the Fed’s objective of promoting employment.
The real difficulty in economics is predicting what humans will do: Feynman once joked "Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings"—or free will . Well, that's just the situation that economists are in.
For your inflation example, we know of causes such as demand-pull, cost-push, and expectations:
The difficulty is not in the predictions, but in accepting accurate ones from accurate models and living life and making policy based on them. Some folks simply do not wish to "accept" them, or wish to ignore them to pursue their own interests.
Climate change models are not inaccurate because people reject their accuracy and smother the findings.
Canary in the coal mine:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinel_species
reply