This webcast is on housing and federal insurance for housing. It also involves bringing water to a thirsty world and controlling flooding in other parts of the world. I will also go over insurance and building design for a changing environment. Let’s start with the NFIP, it is the US flood insurance program, It is designed to provide insurance for flood damage in places where other insurers won’t cover the buildings. The US government subsidizes the program with billions of dollars a year. In other words, the insurance premiums from the insured properties fall short by billions of dollars every year. There is also FEMA with an additional 30 Plus billion per year spent on flood and other damage.
The sad facts are, the NFIP has paid to rebuild close to 45k homes more than 5 times. Then there are more than 2100 that have been rebuilt more than 10 times with one being rebuilt 40 and another 52 times all since 1968. So, the one house has been rebuilt or restored 52 times in 58 years almost once a year and 45 thousand homes once every 10 years. Most of these homes were rebuilt or restored without any mitigation to ensure that the flood did not destroy the house again. They are less than 1% of the properties that are insured but are more than 10% of the claims. Most of the houses that are rebuilt are secondary or vacation homes. FEMA is also spending billions a year helping to pay for disasters and giving grants to people who are uninsured. I am not saying it is wrong to help people out who own homes just there needs to be some control over how often we pay to rebuild and or restore them and let’s look at alternatives.
In 1986, Olga McKissic purchased a split‑level home in Louisville, Kentucky. Between 1997 and 2015, the house flooded four times, with water rising as high as 18 to 20 inches. Because she carried flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Olga was able to repair the damage and replace some of her belongings after each event. Still, insurance could not make up for the emotional toll of repeated flooding, or the time and effort required to rebuild her life again and again. After the 2015 flood, Olga decided she could no longer stay. She found a buyer for the property, but another flood struck before the sale closed, causing the deal to fall through. In response to the 2015 flooding, the city of Louisville and the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) launched a program to purchase damaged homes, demolish the structures, and preserve the land as open space to prevent future development in high‑risk areas. However, limited funding meant MSD could offer no more than $100,000 per home. Because Olga’s house was worth more than that, selling would have forced her to sacrifice her equity and left her unable to afford a comparable home elsewhere. MSD later sought a FEMA grant to expand the buyout program and include higher‑value homes like Olga’s. But two years after the 2015 flood, the grant still had not been approved. MSD warned that FEMA funding can take years to materialize—a common frustration for communities trying to help residents relocate from vulnerable properties. As a result, Olga remains in a home that has flooded multiple times, waiting and hoping for a fair offer before the next disaster strikes. Only 2% of FEMA response money is spent on mitigation along with about 20% of NFIP being spent on mitigation. Every dollar spent on mitigation saves 6 to 13 dollars over the long run.
There is also the issue of a large number of structures burning down every year in fire storms. Yes, climate change is affecting the frequency and severity of the storms, this is both fire and water events, but there is also the issue of antiquated design of homes. The fire testing of materials allowed in structures does not test the effect of wind driven fires, it only test fire that is adjacent to the materials without any wind. The testing also falls short on testing the entire assembly. Forest management is falling behind. 80 million acres are in need of management and are at a point of catastrophic fire. Unfortunately, the Forest service is only able to affect 2 to 4 million acres. Fires also add backlogs as they need to be addressed/ reforested they are adding millions of acres a year, to a backlog of about 4 million acres but are only getting 250k plus acres. The worst thing is that the back log of not managing forests is added to the number of acres burned which means the forest service needs more money to fight the wildfires. Then that cuts into their budget and it is harder for them to do their job. Yes, congress has approved more money but not enough to begin to rectify the issue. The point is we can not only do a better job of forest and flood management, and we need to do a better job of building design and code enforcement.
There is also a housing shortage, it is estimated that we need 4 to 6 million more housing units than are available. There are also corporations buying about 9% of the market. The lack of supply and corporate exploitation rase rents and the cost of homes. Another issue with housing is there is not affordable land near major areas where work is concentrated. So, Housing development companies build a long way away from cities because the land is inexpensive. This has several downsides. One is traffic because millions of people drive over 50 miles to get to work, all at generally the same time. Next it cuts into farmland. It also adds to pollution and greenhouse gas release.
Unfortunately, I feel I need to bring up our current state of affairs and diverge for a minute. I am doing this with the hopes of exposing the ignorance and incompetence of what are supposed to be our leaders. I hope by exposing this weakness we will at least repeat our ill-informed voting decisions less often, not again would be better but I don’t see that happening. We have a lot of our elected officials who make very poor decisions for our country, there are way more politicians that hurt our country more than help our country. Now I should clarify that last statement: there are more elected officials that help out the rich and business than the average American. A recent bill called the big, beautiful bill increases taxes on the average household making less than $15,000 a year will they see a tax increase of over 9 percent in 2027. By 2033, when many temporary provisions in the tax portion of the law expire, this group will experience a 56 percent tax increase. While people earning $40,000 a year will see an average tax decrease of only $393, worth a few weeks of groceries, people making over $1 million a year will see their taxes go down by $97,000 in 2027. All of the tax cuts are funded; in other words the U. S. is going further into debt by 3.5 billion a year.
Sometimes they are just Stupid. Case in point is Trump came to California during a crisis where the state had several fire storms burning at once destroying 1000s of structures. He started by calling the governor’s names. This is not proper behavior of an adult, unless your pissed off. It is totally unbecoming of any of our leaders, especially the top authorities. That’s not that big of a deal, it`s just childish, and an embarrassment for the country. The thing that really hurt California was that he ordered the letting go of billions of gallons of water. In typical trump fashion he did not look to the actual reason L.A. did not have enough water to put out fires but ordered the release of water from dams to help them. He also tweeted how great he was for doing so.
In actuality, the water he released hurt California, as most of the state is almost always short on water. He also released it at a time when it could not be used by farmers to irrigate, as it was winter. Luckily the state was able to reduce the amount of water he ordered to be released by about half through communication with the army corps of engineers. Now not only was it harmful to waste this precious resource, but the water system he ordered the water released into is not connected to the area where the fires were. Even if the two separate waterways were connected it wouldn’t have helped because the actual issue is that the storage tanks that were at a location in close proximity to the fires were the issue. They had been emptied and could not be replenished as quickly as they were being used. It is a local issue that LA and California will have to address. But this is typical trump fashion, not looking at the actual issue but performing some grandiose EXPENSIVE solution that makes headlines, but does not or does very little to actually correct the issue and unfortunately it usually exacerbates the problem.
So, we need solutions to several issues that are all related. I propose that we expand the NFIP and include fire insurance as it will become harder to get. Next we limit the amount of time a home can be rebuilt. I really think it should be cut down to once. I think most of us would want some control on the amount of time a home is rebuilt after a flood. If you have to rebuild it every 10 years that seems a little excessive. I don’t know an exact acceptable number, but I am thinking at least once every 50 years is even to often. Climate change should be added to calculations of the severity and probability of disasters happening. Mony spent on minor repairs raising floor joists and making openings in foundations walls should be fully reviewed with the idea that storms are going to be more significant and happen more often
There should be maps drawn that point out where floods and fires are likely. The maps should be designed to show where not to build rather it be flood, fire, earthquake or other high probability natural disasters. We should also do research on building and make them more resistant to natural disasters and be built for the disasters they are likely to encounter. We also need to make sure premiums fit the exposure. The rates should be reduced to a point where they are not prohibitive but still have enough of the actual burden in them to entice owners to move away from the disaster zones. We should also look into trying to move cities or at least buy out the homeowners so they can move rather the rebuild. Then the areas that were flooded can be dredged and provide spill areas (and other flood absorbing designs) for the next storm. I would also like to see pipes that start taking water out of riparian areas when it is available, but especially when flooding is predicted and send the water to the dryer parts of the country. These pipes should have turbines incorporated into them to generate the electricity needed to pump. The systems should be designed to use as little energy as possible, like adding siphon system and other energy conservation ideas. By doing this we are reducing the damage from the flooding and helping farming and communities in both the flood prone areas and dryer regions. The dryer regions can also pay for the water to help pay for the costs.
To help with housing creep from cities and reduce traffic along with a host of other benefits I propose that the federal government help state and local governments rebuild the deteriorating areas of cities. Generally, the first rings of cities have outdated buildings, deteriorated MEP (Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing), insulation, infrastructure and design. Another thing about these properties is that they tend to have small homes vs lot size. Areas can be called specified that are the most cost-effective and needed. Then there can be a freeze on prices and yes there will have to be eminent domain, and the government can purchase these areas. Then one or more lot(s) can be picked
And the owner/tenants can be housed somewhere else. Then that home is demolished. Mean while well all of his is happening Container home or another quick build system that can be done off site are being built. So, once the area is leveled and a footing is in place the new home can be installed. But as they are generally big lots and we can build up, several units can be placed on the one lot. Then other owners/tenants are moved, and the same thing is done with their lots until we have the entire community consolidated into a smaller area. Then we build designer communities. At least 4 story condominiums that lend to certain lifestyles, some for families, some for singles, etc. The ones for families will have more parks and be designed for more families. The ones for singles can have more entertainment facilities designed for their lifestyles. We can also provide green roofs and balconies to provide food and education about food. They should also be designed so you can get most of the items we need for our daily lives on foot. We should encourage smaller independent stores, maybe do a national supply chain for them so they can compete with larger chains along with making life affordable for the tenants. This is a basic framework to get the idea going, but we should actually ask the people who were moved and people who are hoping to move in what their interest and hobbies are, get them involved from the start. The folks who were forced to move could have first dibs on what units they want to help offset their burden of being moved. The cost of the people whose land is being repurposed we can try to make their mortgage is less than they were paying prior to the transition as an incentive. If they owned the previous home outright, they could pay in full for the unit or a lesser amount and pocket the money they were paid.
So, imagine new communities, where there is ample parking, ample transportation, most of what you need id within walking distance, you can get fresh vegetables, fruit and fish that were grown less than a mile from where you live. Fruit and vegetables that were allowed to ripen on the vine. Ample place to plug in your electric car. Lots of people who have shared interests right next door. Less traffic once you get on the freeway. Or potholes, a two-hour drive each day and lots of pollution.
Now here is the part that will really help society, the units can be rent-to-own. Have the down payment be the same as first and last. This will also help the government as they can be collecting the mortgage to help pay for the original expenditure and lower the national debt. Another advantage to the container home idea is that it can be done in stages. Really metered out according to the demand for housing and jobs. Emphasize acquiring land and building more container units when there is a demand for housing, and when there is a demand for work emphasis on the actual community and new condos. Yes, it will cost billions of dollars, but it should return trillions of dollars over 30 years. The billions of dollars is for each project but so is the trillions of dollars in returns, we are talking about getting rid of the national debt and once that is done lower taxes and/or invest in new technologies. This plan also cuts down on monies cities are putting into aged areas of the city. It can cost 10 to 20 times the amount to redo water and sewer lines. The same cost savings will be seen in public transportation expansion. On top of all that we cut down on pollution, have better communities, better education, better life`s. We can even try to make sure communities are integrated in ethnicity and economically, Unfortunately I that may take time, but lets at least put it as a goal.
