On 1/12/2025 4:36 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 2:43:02 AM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 1/11/2025 2:16 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Saturday, January 11, 2025 at 1:55:12 PM UTC-7 John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 2:17 PM Alan Grayson
<agrays...@gmail.com> wrote:
/> What isn't being discussed is the likely banking
crisis as a result of these fires. With entire neighhoods
burning out of existence, I wouldn't be surprised if
there's a Trillion+ dollars of bad debt being created, as
homeowners default on their mortgages./
*The figure I've heard is $135 billion in fire damage,it
would take more than that to cause a banking crisis. *
*
*
*John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>*
That's just a preliminary estimate for rebuilding houses and
*total *infrastructure replacement. Three months ago, State Farm,
a major insurance company, cancelled 70% of its fire insurance
policies in the LA area, so I infer that most homeowners are
uninsured, and those that are, likely won't collect anything
since insurance is not structured for this type of near global
disaster and many will declare bankruptcy to avoid paying and
going under. Fire Insurance works when there are sporadic fires,
not as in this case where entire towns are wiped out, like
Altadena, north and east of Pasadena where I resided when I
worked for JPL, and Pacific Palisades, and some others. Given the
number of homes totally destroyed and the likely lack of
insurance among a majority of residents, IMO the total damage,
including mortgage defaults, could exceed one TRILLION dollars. AG
Remember, those properties were almost all insured. The insurance
companies also buy reinsurance so they spread the risk further. A
trillion dollars is probably high for rebuilding everything.
There were around a thousand homes and buildings burned, I'd
estimate around 500K$ per house to rebuild. The insurance
companies will pay off. They many not want to insure new homes,
but the state may require them to or else not do any business in CA.
Brent
The number of buildings burned is around 10,000 and counting, and
probably most were not insured for fire. I have a friend from JPL who
lives in La Verne and he's not insured for fire because, he said, the
annual rate is too high. He mentioned it as $15,000.
If he's not insured for fire that means he doesn't have a mortgage,
which means he owns his home outright. Median home price is just under
1M$ so insuring it for 1.5% is quite reasonable, especially if his home
on the north side against the mountains. Of course now there may not be
any insurance available, except the State provided backup plans...is
that what he thought was too expensive?
Leaving CA could be the best option for insurance companies rather
than going bankrupt. AG
You sound like an insurance executive who thinks having to pay out is an
unforeseen event. Insurance companies payout of catastrophe's all the
time. Nobody buys insurance to protect against ordinary small risks.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/65c75f69-f034-495b-bbc2-e9ad8aafab2b%40gmail.com.
