DarnThisStuff
40684
902
62
https://www.newsweek.com/jon-farney-state-farm-california-wildfires-2013049
Jan 11, 2025 6:34 PM
DarnThisStuff
40684
902
62
https://www.newsweek.com/jon-farney-state-farm-california-wildfires-2013049
pravetz
Commissioner, fetch the Luigi signal
tobiasakerman892718
Be the chance
stonebreaker6
Deny, defend, DEPOSE
Magus25
I'm waiting for people to start go fund me programs to get people screwed over by insurance companies, various weapons, and maps to CEO's houses.
CatSparkleBreaker
real life villain... or business hero?
nooneneedsmorethan16kofram
So basically the risk was too high to be insured? That’s perfectly fine and if they hadn’t decided on their own regulators would have forced them to. Most possibly the company would have filed for bankruptcy otherwise. If possible, homeowners could have insured their property for a higher premium with other companies. Given the probability of such events it’s not uncommon for insurance companies to adjust for risk. In Germany most properties e.g in close proximity to water are uninsurable.
rojelioenescabeche
Fuck you Jon. I’m actually talking about my old “ boss” that spelled his name like that. But yeah fuck this guy too.
rubypilgrim
Insurance companies were created for the conditions of the 20th century. Climate change like this was unimaginably distant, if at all plausible then. California has been in talks with insurance companies to figure out how much the state needs to pay them to keep insuring properties here, but the climate is changing so quickly that a number can't be estimated. I've been trying to change the building codes so we can actually build fireproof homes, but there are no simple or cheap solutions.
FetlockDeepInHuman
I may start selling MLFA (Make Luigi Free Again) hats
ShadeMeadowsArt
DO EET.
METROlD
Imagine paying State Farm for 20 years for your home owners insurance, and never filing a claim. Then having your policy cancelled 1 month before your house burns to the ground.
jethro007
Unfortunate500
People are talking about rebuilding these communities, so yeah, fire insurance companies absolutely need to pull the fuck out before they insure more than they can cover.
That is their whole purpose. If they know they have to replace your 5 million house every decade, you gotta expect them to charge at least that much. The better call is to say "it is unreasonable to build here"
soundonlyandloud
RadioactiveNerfDart
This country needs a battalion of Luigis.
mchococakes
Unpopular opinion- but what are they supposed to do ? Climate change related disasters rapidity increasing and the losses are outstanding.
Insurance is based on the idea of risk sharing. We all pay a premium and when the rare claim happens, insurance pays to fix it.
When insurance is paying out more than they take in, why would they keep writing policies ?
Our elected officials should be combating climate change.
Wardonk3y
Not going to be a popular opinion, but get used to this shit. As warming/weather gets more extreme insurance companies are going to not insure/cancel policies in an effort to save from paying out....health insurance, different animal. Take their ass to task.
Bonnedad
Let the bodies hit the floor
TrueLegateDamar
No one's stopping you.
whoshitthebed
Insurance carriers pull out of markets alllll the time. This happened a year ago and the policy holders were made aware of their policy being non-renewed 90+ days in advance. If they didn't secure new coverage it's not State Farms fault.
veronicablood
Munchman347
They canceled fire policies last year for the same reason you can't get flood insurance in Florida and Tornado insurance in Kansas or Oklahoma. There are still companies that will insure 'High Risk' clients, but at their rates it might be cheaper to just build a new home...
Lulabel73
I don’t think you know how it works. The insurance company assessed the situation. They’re not denying claims, they didn’t sell a product in the first place. It should have been warning bells for the government in that area that houses were deemed at a high fire risk. They ignored the dead canary.
DarnThisStuff
This would be the "depose" part. They had insurance then it was taken away.
Lulabel73
Insurance is a business, if they can’t cover their policies they’re not going to offer that product that would be fraud (or whatever )or they would go bankrupt. People would not get their payouts. The government should have paid attention to why insurance was not offered. And I’m sorry but what a murderer has to say means nothing to me.
snowdragondaddy
Ready Player 2...
idrinkcheapbeer
Wow. Someone in the state farm boardroom was like "the handwriting is on the wall. we need to get out of this fire business immediately"
freshthrowaway1138
This is going on in every board room. Climate Change is gonna destroy tons of communities. And the reality is that most of these communities should not be rebuilt and they definitely should not be rebuilt with existing pathetic building codes. But they will because idiot voters will get upset that they have to modify their behaviors to deal with a changing environment.
makeamericasmartagain9000
It feels like every second post is about capitalism fucking somebody in the a$$. I honestly feel sorry for all Americans who are looking for political and societal progress. But at this point I completely lost hope. It is extremely depressing and I lost my positive side. I have many close American friends and they feel the same.
ThatGuyWomack
You need to try to start seeing this for what it is: a narrative to drive opinions and rage-bait. They are using bent truths (or in this case, outright lies), to make you mad at a system. No one is immune to propaganda! You're seeing more negativity all the time because they're shoving down your throat, not because bad things are happening more often.
MrSnuffleupagus172
The memo went out to all influencers (domestic and foreign actors) that this is the topic to start focusing on, to gin up the echo chamber.
makeamericasmartagain9000
Thanks for your words. They are highly appreciated. As a scientist and teacher i go to work with lots of motivation, curiosity and the thought that we as humans will make a step forward. And almost every day something capitalistic hits me and I am like: WTF.
walnutbreath
OP is big dumb. State Farm didn't do anything unethical by refusing to write coverage where they knew it would lead to their insolvency. It's not like they wrote a bunch of policies and are now saying we can't/won't pay. What other businesses should be forced to operate at a loss? If it's good for businesses, why not individuals? OP, sell me your car for $20 and house for $100.
Iblamemyparentstoo
Fuck them! My insurance rates went up because "there was a rash of accidents in my area" not accidents I had any involvement in or was responsible for but because other people had accidents. I live in a nice area so it's not like these accidents are rampant hit and run or by uninsured drivers. Fuck them!
walnutbreath
Risk is pooled. That's what insurance is. Auto insurance's pool is zip code-based. You're assigned to tiers based on driving and claims history. You pay less for having a clean driving record and no recent history of claims. You're mad because you don't understand the product you purchased.
Iblamemyparentstoo
I'm mad because I haven't had any accidents so why the fuck should I be forced to pay for others people's accidents when that's what the people who had the accidents insurance pays premiums is for. My rates don't go down when the accident rates are lower in my area! And how do those boots taste?
walnutbreath
OK, got it, you're an angry idiot. Fuck off.
Iblamemyparentstoo
Don't you have some boots to lick?
Lassannn
The only reason I have car insurance is because it's required by law.
ThatGuyWomack
Serious question: what do you do if you cause an accident, and wreck someone else's car? Do you have the $$$ to just buy them another car?
freshthrowaway1138
And this is why it is a good thing that the State requires insurance. Because you probably don't have the cash to fix the cars and human bodies that will be wrecked by an accident you caused.
walnutbreath
Well, you're a dipshit. Congrats.
arrogantengineer
I personally have car insurance because if I were to gravely injure somebody it guaratees that there will be money available to compensate them appropriately for e.g., a lost leg, pain and suffering, etc.
torokunai
How much do you owe on your car?
You're allowed to post a $35,000 surety bond if you don't want to pay insurance in CA.
walnutbreath
If you have $35k in cash to pay a bond, you likely also have other assets that can be seized in a judgment against you.
This is objectively horrible advice.
Badwolf09
Yeah, I TOTALLY have an extra 35k just lying around to cover a bond. That's SO easy, why didn't I think about that before?
/S
torokunai
If you don't have $35k to indemnify a harmed party in an accident you caused, you don't belong behind the wheel of a 3,000+ lb automobile.
Lassannn
Car's paid for, but I'm in NC. I have no idea about surety bonds and such.
torokunai
NC requires $85k surety bond. That's actually pretty reasonable given if you f up and send somebody to the hospital it can cost that much.
https://www.caranddriver.com/car-insurance/a36534131/car-insurance-alternatives/
[deleted]
[deleted]
DarnThisStuff
Billionaires aren't people.
largomatic
Alledgedly murdered (innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that is).
eion85
Jury nullification would send another, arguably more powerful, message to the CEOs.
rusrsdude
Insurance companies don't care if they commit mass genocide of the poor just to line their pockets. Which.. is basically what's been happening in the US.. People are too poor to pay for hospital bills and their insurance companies more than quadruple the cost of simple procedures and drugs. I'd take another Luigi over any CEO.
thinkybrainpains
Ok but let’s be clear: he murdered a mass murderer.
BobbyBobbston
Murder - by definition, meaning calculated and targeted (which is what this was) - should *never* go without punishment. There are many situations in which it is understandable, and I would not advocate for the full extent of the law to be applied, but it should never be entirely without punishment.
wurth
Self defense and the defense of others is an acceptable defense to murder in many courts.
knexusatx
Why the fuck not?
EternallyIgnorant
I agree that a murder should not just be ignored legally. the law is the law. With that said, Jury nullification exists, as does a judge choosing to give a light sentence, etc. I made a similar comment about the woman who lit her daughter's rapist on fire, killing him. the legal system shouldnt just pick and choose who they apply the law to, BECAUSE it leads to even more corruption, but there are many ways of applying leniency.
EternallyIgnorant
I would hope someone who kills their childs murderer is let off extremely easily, by the judge, the jury, prison guards if they go, Parole officers, future potential employers. But the that said What if they made up that this person did something? we need you know, some sort of system to determine if they actually were guilty, and then a process to deal with them..
BobbyBobbston
Absolutely. But to me, there is a *huge* difference between "passing easily through the path dictated by law" and "go unpunished altogether through social/political pressure". If the fire exit seems open to everyone, people will be more tempted to set the building aflame in the first place - which is a shit metaphor, but you know.
EternallyIgnorant
And to those who disagree, I could link a story of a black man getting lynched for supposedly raping a white woman, and you would be ok with that murder, correct? Because you are logically consistent? What happens when its discovered they werent actually guilty? Do you stick to your guns and say this person who killed a random innocent person should be let off scot free? Or would you say they were wrong for murdering a random person?
arrogantengineer
Are you people so dumb as to think that State Farm should be *forced* to sell you insurance at the state price? Because that's what this article is about, how State Farm realized "oh shit this is a tinderbox due to climate change" and canceled policies *last year*. And yet many of you will take the exact opposite approach when people build houses on the coastline and they sink laugh at them when they want the government to pay for it...
DarnThisStuff
This would be the "depose" part. They had insurance then it was taken away.
torokunai
yeah. Until the recent insurance reforms the insurance companies couldn't use up-to-date risk models to price insurance for these at-risk locations, so they said Sayonara.
Plus with the system set up in the 1960s (FAIR plan); all the major insurances had to subsidize the FAIR plan risk pool based on their market share . . . this forced State Farm to stop issuing ALL new policies in the state a couple of years ago since there's just too much risk there.
ucandcantunc
Here in NC they FORCE the expense of these rich idiots building on the beach on the rest of us ....so why not build in a hurricaine area? The rest of NC will have to pay more to cover their stupidity.
MrSnuffleupagus172
https://www.newsweek.com/california-homeowners-get-new-protection-insurance-cancellations-2013420
300Hectares1TankofKerosene
State Farm had no problem accepting millions in premiums from those same customers for decades. But when they determined they might not have a complete statistical advantage they bailed. Im so tired of our “lets fuck the customer as much as possible” brand of capitalism. Also, its land that retains most of the value, not the house on the land.
ucandcantunc
That's not how insurance works. If they keep covering this high risk areas, guess who is gonna pay? YOU. Even if you live in a relatively safer area. As Florida,
300Hectares1TankofKerosene
They’ve greatly reduced coverage on the FL coast as well. They know hurricane intensity and recurrence are increasing. The cost of rebuilding and paying all the claims are outpacing premium increases and cutting too much into the profit margin. To solve this, they will limit coverage in volatile areas.
magikmarker
Did they cancel paid policies during the term, or did they refuse to renew the policies for another term?
arrogantengineer
Declined to renew.
magikmarker
So many people think that they are cancelling paid policies midterm
AliceAndRabbit
A refund would be nice. I paid into the system for decades to cover catastrophe. Then they cancel? It's similar (not exactly like) paying into Social Security for decades then hypothetically getting that canceled. I've been putting money into insurance for years, under the assumption that they have the capabilities to disperse it to those that encounter catastrophe. And climate change is a catastrophe. They took the $ and ran. They forecasted that they would have to do their job and give $ back
arrogantengineer
The insurance model in your mind is a complete figment of your imagination. You do not "pay into" insurance. It is not a piggy bank. You do not have an account with them. It is like buying an ice cream cone. You buy it and you eat it. If you want another one tomorrow they don't have to sell you one at the same price or any price. And yes you "eat it" even if you did not make a claim, because what you actually paid them for was to offloand and manage the risk, which they did.
ucandcantunc
So a shitty driver in multiple accidents should get a refund when they drop him?
walnutbreath
You want a refund, get insurance through a mutual company. Otherwise, go pound sand.
DeepFriedAndSanctified
First of all, Social Security is a government program. Insurance is not. Second, you got what you paid for. Insurance is not a lifetime contract. Homeowners insurance is usually for 5 years. They didn't "take the money and run." They fulfilled their contract with you, and then decided not to enter a new one. You wouldn't think twice about changing insurance providers if you were getting a better deal. Why should an insurance provider think twice either?
walnutbreath
Most homeowners' insurance policies are 1 year policies in the U.S.. I don't know of any 5 year policies (and have never heard of one).
chloramphenicolderivative
Yeah, they didn't cut anybody's contracts; they honored the all the deals they already had, and then stopped offering it. Should companies be mandated to offer products forever, even after they become unprofitable?
Pyrowolf1
In the case of insurance, yes, you build or buy your house knowing it is insured and a house is a very long commitment, not something you can pick up and move when your insurance doesn't renew your contract
RunThatIn
why do yall feel like businesses should be endless sources of profit with no risk? the whole point of why a capitalist is supposed to deserve his portion of the money is because he’s taking a risk with it. You don’t get to hedge all the risk out of the equation and reap only benefits. That’s not how this shit works either
walnutbreath
Why do you feel businesses should be all risk with no profit? Because that's what the SoCal and Florida homeowners markets are.
Maybe you should give away all your stuff because you seem fine with compelling others to do so.
arrogantengineer
That's not the case here. State Farm did take a risk in the form of specific duration (e.g., 1-year) contract for property insurance. It ran it course. State Farm declined to renew it when the time came because they were unable to price the risk appropriately. That is exactly how it is supposed to work.
RunThatIn
sure according to the capitalist it’s always supposed to work in their favor. you’re literally watching capitalism fail us at every turn but you wanna slurp those guys so bad to get a little bit of social status. big loser energy
DeepFriedAndSanctified
You know, screw you. There's many things I hate on Imgur, but few more than when a person tries to rationally address an argument and the other person engages in ad hominem attacks. It's lazy and intellectually stifling.
nasukkin
The problem is that when they withdraw, the cost of buying a new contract has skyrocketted in recent years. My grandmother's insurance company (not State Farm) decided to not renew when her contract expired last year, because they flew a drone over the house and said they thought the roof looked kind of old. We fought with them over it and got the contract renewed after paying roofers thousands of dollars to come out and recertify the roof. If we hadn't, a new comparable contract for ... 1/2
nasukkin
... the house would have cost several thousand dollars more per year.
Should the law permit homeowners to own uninsured homes? Because if the mass-exodus of insurers willing to provide contracts here in California continues as it has these past years, that will be the only option.
walnutbreath
If you don't have a mortgage, you don't need to have homeowners insurance. It's like that in every state.
Your mortgage lender has a legal right to add lawful conditions to their mortgage contracts such as requiring the borrower to maintain homeowners insurance.
freshthrowaway1138
It is the banks that require insurance on homes, so if you aren't paying for a mortgage then you don't need to have insurance. Also, once areas are unable to get insurance on a home, the you'll see home sales collapse.
Youreprobablylyingoronlythinkingofyourself
Home owners insurance and mortgage insurance are two different things
arrogantengineer
??? There is no law that requires you have home insurance. You are think of Auto.
theobituator
There is if you have a mortgage...
Ismellofhockey
Agreed. This isn't scummy business. It's a company whose expertise is predicting the future acknowledging we've fucked up the planet too much for its business model to be profitable well in advance of the current crisis.
infernalspectre
I think what people are getting angry about is that the overall insurance industry is predatory. They are happy to take our money when the math is in their favor, but the moment it isn't they pull away a layer of protection that people may need. It might not be scummier than the status quo, but that doesn't mean it isn't scummy.
RunThatIn
they lobby to make it mandatory to own a house then deny you when it’s convenient and dump the burden back on the tax payer. Either insure everyone or nationalize it, this bullshit pick and choose garbage is just exploitation.
Ismellofhockey
I'm not too familiar with insurance policies. But I see it going one of two ways. If you signed an agreement to be insured for a specified period of time at a fixed price and they bow out early, it's predatory. If your payment only covers you year over year and they bow out early, it's fair game.
walnutbreath
The insurance companies lobbied to make it mandatory to own a house? When did I miss that?
Nothing you've written on this post shows an ounce of intelligence or knowledge. You're just an angry idiot.
freshthrowaway1138
Mandatory to own a home? Where is this? Or are you talking about mandatory to have home owner's insurance? Because that's not true. Banks require insurance while you are paying a mortgage in order to cover the risk for the loan repayment.
arrogantengineer
You don't understand the concept of insurance. If the math isn't in their favor, how the hell are they supposed to pay out? Anything else is just totally unsustainable.
infernalspectre
Wow you really are arrogant. I understand insurance. I understand capitalism. I just don't think they are the correct method. Insurance should go back to it's roots. Funded by the people, for the people. Not for fat cats to make a profit.
arrogantengineer
Then go create such an insurance company.
freshthrowaway1138
When was this magical time of insurance? AFAIK, capitalists have always existed since the beginning of insurance, and they've always exploited the working class.
aerodynamit3
Insurance roots are with merchants splitting their inventory across other merchants inventories so that if one of them goes bust (gets killed or destroyed by some weather events) nobody loses everything. It's never been like how you'd described ever, that's not what insurance is.
Alurkerforcedtologin
The people cheering and saying let California burn the people deserve it, consider this, where are those people you've never met yet hate so much going to go if they leave California, huh? They're going to move to your precious Republican utopia and start voting in Democrats, so maybe stop cheering at people suffering.
RoamingEast
maybe thats exactly what i want them to do.
Lulabel73
I think you’ll find Imgur is a very left leaning site and there are many “cheering on” comments on this post alone. It’s not politics it’s bitterness from entitled unsympathetic people.
freshthrowaway1138
We definitely need an electoral migration in the US. We have too many isolating in too few states and letting the GOP seize control. It would be best if we could form 10K person colonization programs that move excess Blue voters from safe Blue States to small population Red States or purple states with Red districts. Blue state populations have the cash to subsidize those moves as well. We should be colonizing the rest of the US, not fleeing.
gnowmgnight6
They will just gerrymander the shit outta those areas those "refugees" are encouraged to move to.
freshthrowaway1138
That's a possibility, but it's better than what is currently happening- retreat. We are losing this country because of our inability to hold States and Districts. Red Voters stay and that gives them power in our Constitutional system.
This isn't about refugees but about colonization. Climate Change is already going to drive, according to the experts, 1 in 12 Americans to be internally displaced due to climate disasters. I think it would be a good thing to have Blue support networks in place.
Alurkerforcedtologin
It's not just a problem of Democrats huddling in safe blue states. If you can just get existing eligible voters in every state to vote, the Republicans wouldn't ever win another federal election. Most people don't support trump. About 90 million people DIDN'T vote in 2024, 9 million more than 2020. And I understand why. In my state, every single election goes to the 20% population that occupy 80% of the land. Every. single. time. Abolish gerrymandering, and you fix the problem.
freshthrowaway1138
Well you can't abolish gerrymandering without winning elections. Heck, the reason gerrymandering exists is because the voters were too lazy, unorganized, or simply OK with nazis to beat back the GOP politicians. So in the end, the local voters are unreliable which is why new voters from out of state are required.
knexusatx
I'll cheer the rich fucks burning as long as that fire is going
johnxbear
The rich don't live there. It's just their disposable homes.
ghornby
The poor and rich burn alike.
knexusatx
At least some of the rich burn this time
ghornby
How many poors are worth the destitution of one rich?
knexusatx
It's a fucking fire, not warfare