“And since there’s still not the ability for people to shop around for other options, what are they going to do but pay that higher rate? But I think that it’s probably going to show pretty quickly that it’s necessary to keep State Farm from literally going insolvent.”
Seems like you conveniently forgot another option here? Seize the fucking company. It belongs to California now.
Well, you’re going to piss off the policyholders then. State Farm is a mutual insurance company. It’s owned by the policyholders. It’s essentially a non-profit, since profits go to reduce premiums or pay dividends to the policyholders.
The thing is, the company isn’t turning a profit. When what fills the cup doesn’t match the hole in the bottom, at some point the cup will be empty. California has mismanaged the wilderness areas and allowed development without concern for potential fire danger. Climate change, high fuel loads after decades of suppressing natural fires, improperly maintained electrical infrastructure, and a lack of “Fire Wise” education are all contributing to huge wildfires and high property loss rates.
If California were to seize every insurance company in the state, they would quickly be in the same predicament - needing to raise premiums to cover the losses.
The only real solution is to reduce the risk. That’s why the NFPA came up with local Fire Safe Councils. We educate the homeowners about how to make our homes resistant to wildfire damage. Using grant money, we reduce the fire danger by clearing hazardous undergrowth. We provide resources for homeowners, like chipping programs, matching funds for tree removal, and other assistance in maintaining defensible space. We have successfully lobbied for insurance discounts when homeowners complete risk reduction measures.
California already has a state run home insurance company. They are allowed to charge whatever they need to charge to always offer a plan to any homeowner even in high risk areas. Guess what? It’s twice as expensive as State farm.
If I had the option of paying State farm 50% more or paying double to go back to CA fair plan, guess which I’d choose.
I have FAIR plan and a homeowners insurance jsut for 1 house. Both together are less than state farm would charge for 1 homeowner policy not needing the fair plan.
I wonder if it varies by area kinda like car insurance. Down here in San bernardino national forest state farm will not issue new policies for homes since middle of last year if I remember. But they’ll keep current and up to date policy holders stay with them. The fair plan as you know is for any fire outside the home (the forest). My fair plan has gone up $10 in the 4 years I’ve had it. And I’ve had zero increase on my state farm. Couldn’t tell you the exact numbers at the moment as they’re in my mortgage payment. I’ll check now that we’re on the subject
That you don’t understand the fundamentals of the industry (as described in the other detailed comment), and jumped to knee jerk fixes that are anything but.
Edit contextually: as described in the other comment, state farm is not a traditional corp as you seem to imagine it, and if the state owned it it would be experiencing the exact same financial issues.
Seems like you conveniently forgot another option here? Seize the fucking company. It belongs to California now.
Well, you’re going to piss off the policyholders then. State Farm is a mutual insurance company. It’s owned by the policyholders. It’s essentially a non-profit, since profits go to reduce premiums or pay dividends to the policyholders.
The thing is, the company isn’t turning a profit. When what fills the cup doesn’t match the hole in the bottom, at some point the cup will be empty. California has mismanaged the wilderness areas and allowed development without concern for potential fire danger. Climate change, high fuel loads after decades of suppressing natural fires, improperly maintained electrical infrastructure, and a lack of “Fire Wise” education are all contributing to huge wildfires and high property loss rates.
If California were to seize every insurance company in the state, they would quickly be in the same predicament - needing to raise premiums to cover the losses.
The only real solution is to reduce the risk. That’s why the NFPA came up with local Fire Safe Councils. We educate the homeowners about how to make our homes resistant to wildfire damage. Using grant money, we reduce the fire danger by clearing hazardous undergrowth. We provide resources for homeowners, like chipping programs, matching funds for tree removal, and other assistance in maintaining defensible space. We have successfully lobbied for insurance discounts when homeowners complete risk reduction measures.
PG&G isn’t public, they are not maintaining tree lines, lots of this is their fault.
California already has a state run home insurance company. They are allowed to charge whatever they need to charge to always offer a plan to any homeowner even in high risk areas. Guess what? It’s twice as expensive as State farm.
If I had the option of paying State farm 50% more or paying double to go back to CA fair plan, guess which I’d choose.
I have FAIR plan and a homeowners insurance jsut for 1 house. Both together are less than state farm would charge for 1 homeowner policy not needing the fair plan.
You live in a forested area?
Yessir
I’m in the forest. My state farm went down this year surprisingly. Was paying about double for fair plan.
I wonder if it varies by area kinda like car insurance. Down here in San bernardino national forest state farm will not issue new policies for homes since middle of last year if I remember. But they’ll keep current and up to date policy holders stay with them. The fair plan as you know is for any fire outside the home (the forest). My fair plan has gone up $10 in the 4 years I’ve had it. And I’ve had zero increase on my state farm. Couldn’t tell you the exact numbers at the moment as they’re in my mortgage payment. I’ll check now that we’re on the subject
Idk. I feel like government is bad a running one company but is good at scaling up.
I’d rather see ca offer a good baseline insurance plan. That or offer fire protection like they do for flood and earthquake.
You are seizing a dead corpes tho
Assuming the financial report about State Farm’s insolvency in California is true, how do you think this will help?
Lets play out your scenario:
What are you advocating for differently than the scenario above? Where is the needed money going to come from to:
Where is that money?
Classic Lemmy.
Finding solutions that don’t involve screwing literally everybody over just to save an irresponsible corporation?
And your complaint is?
That you don’t understand the fundamentals of the industry (as described in the other detailed comment), and jumped to knee jerk fixes that are anything but.
I’m not having trouble understanding anything. And lashing out at me because your comment was rejected is just projection.
Grow up and learn how to handle your negative emotions like an adult.
Rejected?
You’re the one throwing a tantrum lol
Edit contextually: as described in the other comment, state farm is not a traditional corp as you seem to imagine it, and if the state owned it it would be experiencing the exact same financial issues.
There’s that projection again
It’s fine, you didn’t understand the details. Learning is tough.
Edit go read lemmyfixdat4u 's comment again, your lack of understanding, and kneejerk response is highlighted in the information there.
There’s that projection again