As the brittleness bubble becomes more obvious, more governments will attempt to mandate that insurance companies insure the uninsurable—paradoxically bringing closer the collapse of the bubble itself, as companies are driven more urgently to get out now.
nytimes.com/2019/12/05/cli…
nytimes.com/2019/12/05/cli…
When the downside is losing some insurance premium revenue and the upside is avoiding multiple catastrophic losses, the math for insurance abandonment (before governments start making these demands) is simple.
And, as more places become uninsurable, they also become less credit-worthy, less attractive to outside talent and investment, and ultimately less economically viable.
We have only seen the very edge.
A lot more is on it's way.
We have only seen the very edge.
A lot more is on it's way.
The idea that every community, asset and piece of infrastructure that now exists should—or even can—be insured for its full value (using taxpayer dollars, if necessary) won't last out the next decade.
This, too, is one of the catastrophic costs of climate inaction.
This, too, is one of the catastrophic costs of climate inaction.
