@catmad*2013 wrote:
what concerns me with that sentence is the whole insurance thing.
There are many reasons people don't have insurance for floods... the laws were changed and now when you have insurance for floods you are covered for all floods.. but those laws came in on July 1st last year.. many of these people were still on their old insurance coverage that would have been taken out before July. I know 4 people that thought they were covered but missed out by just a few days...
many people were also from a very low socio economic area... they often cannot afford insurance. they might struggle to pay off a home in a more vulnerable area just so that they can get on the home owner market. They are the hardest hit.
There were also a lot of renters in that area and they often don't have insurance.. they lost it all... and they can't afford to pay the rent in other homes as the rents all went up after the damage to 2000 homes.. we just don't have that many rental properties to cover the overflow.
And to the other poster about 35 dead in the previous flood.. yep.. that was a tragedy... but that does not lessen the flooding we have had here... it does not mean that the heartache and saddness for the people here is lessened. People are struggling to get back on their feet... mental illness is a huge problem... suicide is also a huge problem...you come up here and tell those people that the floods were not as bad as last time.
Crikey, I know I;m about to wade into a bloodbath here and Iza's about to jump on me but *shrugs*
Insurance is right up there with food and air (as many poeople have found) If you have property whether it be a sleeping bag or a mansion, you also need to factor in the cost of insuring it as well. Just like home ownership comes with the responsibility for rates and maintenance etc. I don't get the mentality that "I want something, so I'm gonna have it even though I can't meet all my obligations cos the gov will help me out with the shortfall"(and I mean that across the board, not just for insurance)
I will never understand someone owning something and not insuring it after spending so much money on it. It's kinda like, I really wanted a BMW, but apart from the fact it was a hundred grand more than I could afford, even if I could have scraped together the money for it, there was no way I could have afforded the maintenance and insurance of it etc - so I chose something within my budget.
And if the laws changed last July, I'm sorry, but there is no excuse for not ensuring you were adequately insured in the next 6 months, especially after the previous warning.
I don't see why the government should pay to compensate people for their own stupidity or carelessness.
Don't get me wrong, I really do feel for those that have been affected by all this, but there are steps they could have taken to minimize the fallout - I don't see why the gov should have to step in and help out that sort of stuff. Yep, they need to step in and help get it sorted, you know the public property, emergency short term accommodation etc and make sure the hospitals and roads etc are able to cope with the recovery - but - dunno how to word it. - not hand out a few thousand dollars cos people got inconvenienced or didn't take adequate steps to insure themselves.
I dunno, but maybe some of the political campaign money would have been better spent getting a roof over a few people's heads, eh? Buying a few blankets...
Yeah, the available of rental properties would be rough - I get that,
Some people can go their whole lives and never really live for a single minute.
