Except everywhere is a climate danger zone.
Some places are being hit harder than others. All else being equal, people should move to the places being hit the least.
Wouldn’t a side effect of that, if done en masse, be property values and rent ballooning out of control in the safer areas?
A side-effect? No. You’re just describing climate-safe housing being more valuable. It’s always been more valuable.
In a functional market system, higher rents will result in more housing construction in those areas. I’m not delusional enough to think that the housing market is functional, but that’s a can of worms that will exist regardless of the climate problems or not.
Or to rephrase a bit: yes, if people all try to move to more climate-safe areas, then we’ll need to build more housing in the climate-safe areas for them to move into. Obviously.
Ah yes, the tried and true people move to where the jobs are strategy. Worked really well for globalization.
In actually reality, humans would rather become desert nomads than abandon their tribe.
I worked with homeless people for ten years and people don’t understand just how reluctant people are to move away from where they know. When you have nearly nothing , the few things you do have are much more Important to you. That includes your social connections
That’s interesting, but there are different personality types, maybe some could benefit more from a fresh start?
We are not all so tribal. I emigrated at a moment when I felt I had nothing (except a web-model), this was a a good move, at least for the first few years.
Half the country is a climate danger zone at this point.
Yeah it sure is cheap living in the bread basket of the world, the san joaquin valley. My rent is 334. I even have housing assistance. Ag ag ag is all I hear here, and everyone has no idea how unsustainable industrialized agriculture is. Plus the droughts, the toxicity, the general poverty, and also valley fever.
We definitely need some sort of phase out of coverage for some areas. Something like a lower proportional coverage the more times the area is rebuilt after a natural disaster. There is no reason anyone in the Florida keys should keep getting coverage and rebuilding. It’s been impacted over and over again. People have rebuilt more than 10 times. Ontop of that it’s sinking into the ocean.
Edit: saved before finished.
However, these are not going to be popular policies anywhere. People leaving their hometowns are going to be mad. People who have to deal with out-of-towners coming in and buying all the housing driving prices up are going to be mad. I seriously doubt there will be any political appetite to push for similar policies.
Cap how much is covered so that anything the price of a normal house for someone to live in is covered, but you pay the luxury tax.
I think that would be hard. Who decides? How big of a house. A 900 sqft house costs far less than a 3200 sqft house.
I’m sure we will end up with a hodgepodge of solutions in the end.