Racial disparity in Katrina insurance disuptes - but where is the fault?

[czechmate7]

angelmom~
Yes, thanks for sharing.
We just suffered through Ivan and Dennis not long ago and discovered the same thing as you....the insurance company is not going to seek you out, send an adjuster, go through your house and list everything damaged and mail you a check out of the goodness of their heart...no matter what color, financial background, level of education, etc.... Good for you for taking control of the situation !!!

 

[Nova]

Thanks, angelmom. It's important to remind all of us that there are always individual exceptions to everything.

If and when the "Big One" strikes my part of California, I'm coming here to get advice.

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

Here. Allow me to sum up what the news article really says.
Squeaky wheel = grease
Quiet wheel = allowed to rust up and snap off at spoke

 

[Details]

Thanks, angelmom. It's important to remind all of us that there are always individual exceptions to everything.

If and when the "Big One" strikes my part of California, I'm coming here to get advice.

Don't know that it was an exception - it seems to say everyone is ignorant about the insurance industry - except those who have had a reason to learn about it. And those people may be white or black.

 

[Nova]

Don't know that it was an exception - it seems to say everyone is ignorant about the insurance industry - except those who have had a reason to learn about it. And those people may be white or black.

Shall we rehash the argument all over again? Some people have reasons to expect a better outcome than others when dealing with large corporations or the government. We all make judgments about where to invest our time and energy, based on our expectations of a positive result.

 

[Details]

Shall we rehash the argument all over again? Some people have reasons to expect a better outcome than others when dealing with large corporations or the government. We all make judgments about where to invest our time and energy, based on our expectations of a positive result.

Oh, can we???!!! Yipee!! That's a good investment of my time and energy and yours (just fooling around here, not trying to be sarcastic or mean - picture my best silly little girl voice).

We didn't come up with an agreement on our discussion - lots of similarities, but we still diverge on whether that expectation of a good or bad outcome, when not linked to a reality, is something that the government should be expected to remedy, or that the person themselves is responsible for changing on their own. But this was in another area we discussed, without much info on one side or another - does one or another community grow up knowing more about their rights, protesting these things, how the government can help. In that anecdote, a fair sized community of exactly the opposite character (largely white, suburban, and with money) still knew very little about their rights, insurance companies, didn't know about the government help (and many of them didn't feel it'd do any good either).

 

[windovervocalcords]

Oh, can we???!!! Yipee!! That's a good investment of my time and energy and yours (just fooling around here, not trying to be sarcastic or mean - picture my best silly little girl voice).

We didn't come up with an agreement on our discussion - lots of similarities, but we still diverge on whether that expectation of a good or bad outcome, when not linked to a reality, is something that the government should be expected to remedy, or that the person themselves is responsible for changing on their own. But this was in another area we discussed, without much info on one side or another - does one or another community grow up knowing more about their rights, protesting these things, how the government can help. In that anecdote, a fair sized community of exactly the opposite character (largely white, suburban, and with money) still knew very little about their rights, insurance companies, didn't know about the government help (and many of them didn't feel it'd do any good either).

When the government has been involved in systematic discrimination for centuries then it should apply any and all remedies to heal the harm it caused its citizens by its policies. It should do so until there is parity.

JMO

 

[Details]

When the government has been involved in systematic discrimination for centuries then it should apply any and all remedies to heal the harm it caused its citizens by its policies. It should do so until there is parity.

JMO

Where is the responsibility of the individual? And what is the best remedy to 'fix' a person who is unwilling to try - is it coddling, or tough love?

That family I mentioned on welfare - helping them find jobs, helping them with more skills, giving them a better job application wardrobe, handing them preset interviews with prequalified companies, paying companies to hire them - none of this will make the slightest difference - they can get jobs - they prefer welfare. The way to 'heal the harm' done to them is to cut them off.


And the point I posted above is that there is parity. A white affluent neighborhood is just as likely to be ripped off by insurance companies, ignorant about their rights to protest, and unknowing of government programs to help as a poor neighborhood in NO. But in NO, the gov't reached out, and told people about the programs - and there was parity there.

But in our constitution, we have a critical line - "persuit of happiness" - you don't have a right to perfect parity, because whether or not you get it is your choice. Equality of opportunity, not equality of result.

 

[windovervocalcords]

Where is the responsibility of the individual? And what is the best remedy to 'fix' a person who is unwilling to try - is it coddling, or tough love?

That family I mentioned on welfare - helping them find jobs, helping them with more skills, giving them a better job application wardrobe, handing them preset interviews with prequalified companies, paying companies to hire them - none of this will make the slightest difference - they can get jobs - they prefer welfare. The way to 'heal the harm' done to them is to cut them off.


And the point I posted above is that there is parity. A white affluent neighborhood is just as likely to be ripped off by insurance companies, ignorant about their rights to protest, and unknowing of government programs to help as a poor neighborhood in NO. But in NO, the gov't reached out, and told people about the programs - and there was parity there.

But in our constitution, we have a critical line - "persuit of happiness" - you don't have a right to perfect parity, because whether or not you get it is your choice. Equality of opportunity, not equality of result.

There is co-responsibility. Individual and collective. What person's do you refer to who are unwilling to try?

I have coached people who would otherwise be unable to stand up to authority to do so.

Some people need more help. What is the problem with helping them? No one prefers welfare.

The family you mention may have mental illness or drug addiction along with a cycle of poverty. If you grow up in a family where no one works you may end up thinking this is normal.

Welfare reform has worked. I know this from experience as a counselor working in the field of employment and training. You are talking about a very small minority.

I know this minority intimately by name in my community. They are clients, customers, neighbors. These folks have walked through the furnace of life with mental illness, massive interpersonal dysfunction, substance abuse, domestic violence. In addition, they may have the additional burden of being a minority race or culture.

Some of these folks are not "likeable people". They are damaged beyond repair. Not everyone can be rehabbed. Nonetheless, we owe it to our world to put forth effort and to save the young and innocent bystanders who would otherwise become their parents.

 

[reb]

<When the government has been involved in systematic discrimination for centuries then it should apply any and all remedies to heal the harm it caused its citizens by its policies. It should do so until there is parity.>

wrong, wrong, WRONG. oops-- i meant to say, i don't agree at ALL. when do you stop?? when does this end??
let me ask,, have you lived in an inner city? (at least, in the past 3 1/2 decades??) if so you would see first hand the disaster that government hand-holding & enabling has wrought upon this country, in an effort to right the wrongs of slavery. it's a hopeless situation that has ruined many of our urban areas. it has probably done some good for some,, but for most it has been nothing but opened a huge pandora's box that has caused far more harm than good. it's a well-known fact about human nature, that when you offer a handout to help someone up, they may be ever-so-grateful at first.. but then they get used to it and expect more and more, and pretty soon they are never satisfied and never get on their own feet (why should they?).. and become angry and indignant when you want to cut them off.
if the govt. has left well enough alone decades ago, and said, 'OK, we're sorry- what's done is done- at least slavery is illegal now, and you have every right to educate yourself, go to any college you want, you have the united negro college fund. there are laws against discrimination. the rest is up to you." we would be in a far better position. they took it way too far with affirmative action, and unlimited welfare for so many millions of people.

i agree that not everyone can be rehabbed (too much brain damage, borderline retardation, effects of alcohol/drugs)- nor does everyone want to. but i disagree when you say 'no one prefers welfare'. there certainly are far too many who do!! but at least if someone is truly mentally/physically incapable of working and wants to have welfare for the rest of their lives,, the govt. should only offer it to people who agree to be sterilized- especially when they already have a bunch of children with different deadbeat fathers.

bottom line-- at some point they have got to start taking responsbility for themselves. long ago, the govt. DID get us in this mess by allowing slavery to be legal. obviously no one cared about the ramifications down the line. but enough is enough is enough.

 

[czechmate7]

I have coached people who would otherwise be unable to stand up to authority to do so.

Some people need more help. What is the problem with helping them? No one prefers welfare.

Welfare reform has worked. I know this from experience as a counselor working in the field of employment and training. You are talking about a very small minority.

I know this minority intimately by name in my community. They are clients, customers, neighbors. These folks have walked through the furnace of life with mental illness, massive interpersonal dysfunction, substance abuse, domestic violence. In addition, they may have the additional burden of being a minority race or culture.

Wind, do you mind me asking what state you are in?

Your statement stating that "No one prefers welfare" made me chuckle. Some people out there live to beat the system (and do it very well). When it comes to sitting in line to collect welfare checks or food stamps they seem to understand what they need to do, info they need to submit, paperwork that needs to be filled out; but when it comes to finding out how to file a claim w/the state for insurance claims or grievances they all of a sudden become ignorant? I don't buy that.

 

[Details]

Yep - the family I knew of (related to a coworker is how I heard about them - her in-laws) - they preferred welfare. Welfare reform is a great thing, and hopefully disrupted their lazy lives - and I'm sure they weren't happy about it.

 

[angelmom]

There are some people who absolutely prefer welfare!

Now this is in the UK, but I think it applies. Some friends were planning to go to a wedding this summer in England. They didn't go. When I asked why not, they told me, "They can't afford to get married." I was sympathetic to the escalating costs of a dream wedding, until I was corrected.

They can't afford to get married because they would lose the government benefits she gets for being a single mother...to the child they had together out of wedlock. :banghead:

 

[czechmate7]

How can someone living in poverty even own a home in most instances (I know in NO many people lived in public housing "the projects"..in which filing an insurance claim is irrelavent). Then others living in poverty lucky enough to own a home couldn't possibly own a home worth more than 50k or so, right? An insurance co. is not going to pay a claim of 100k for a house worth way less....or they? And I know from experience that contents of a house is a whole different story and additional coverage is needed on a policy(meaning higher $ policy paid by insurer), which if your living in poverty are most likely not going to be able to afford.

 

[windovervocalcords]

Wind, do you mind me asking what state you are in?

Your statement stating that "No one prefers welfare" made me chuckle. Some people out there live to beat the system (and do it very well). When it comes to sitting in line to collect welfare checks or food stamps they seem to understand what they need to do, info they need to submit, paperwork that needs to be filled out; but when it comes to finding out how to file a claim w/the state for insurance claims or grievances they all of a sudden become ignorant? I don't buy that.

Did you read my previous post? I am aware of people who misuse the system. They are a small minority. The negative attitudes they display that cause them to do so are a combination of seriously dysfuntional family culture, violence, drug addiction etc.

I have spent many years working with poor people from many different cultures. Most want nothing more than the same things you do. A decent life for their loved ones, self-esteem, an opportunity to advance, a chance to contribute to society.

Some of the posts on this thread seem to imply that there is some individual character flaw in the black residents of NO because the whites were three times more likely to have filed for and recieved the insurance benefits they are owed.

I disagree with that view.

 

[Karole28]

I have spent many years working with poor people from many different cultures. Most want nothing more than the same things you do. A decent life for their loved ones, self-esteem, an opportunity to advance, a chance to contribute to society.

The self esteem these people are looking for, will not come until they know they've earned it. By being propped up by government assistance, they'll never earn it. Therefore, they'll never have it. Fake self esteem is worse than none at all.

One of the most interesting aspects of Bowling for Columbine was the woman who blamed Dick Clarke and George Bush for her child being shot by a handgun at her uncle's house.

She was being "forced" to ride a bus to work at Dick Clarke's restaurant in the Work-For-Welfare program, therefore having no one else in the world to watch her child, he had to stay with her uncle (I'm relying on memory for this part). The child got the uncle's handgun and accidently shot himself.

The point, as I took it, was that George Bush and Dick Clarke cause the death of her child.

Amazing convolution, that.

 

[czechmate7]

Did you read my previous post? I am aware of people who misuse the system. They are a small minority. The negative attitudes they display that cause them to do so are a combination of seriously dysfuntional family culture, violence, drug addiction etc.

I have spent many years working with poor people from many different cultures. Most want nothing more than the same things you do. A decent life for their loved ones, self-esteem, an opportunity to advance, a chance to contribute to society.

Some of the posts on this thread seem to imply that there is some individual character flaw in the black residents of NO because the whites were three times more likely to have filed for and recieved the insurance benefits they are owed.

I disagree with that view.

The majority of post I've read seem to suggest that it isn't a matter of "black residents" but a matter of individuals of a poverty level.... I feel racist people see things in black or white. The majority of the posters on this thread haven't implied racism at all.
You have stated that you work with poor people but you choose not to disclose the state (which is your right) but I can tell you, I grew up in NO area, lived in VA (Navy vet), OH, AZ, TX and FL and poverty is different in every state (really, it is.) What I'm trying to say is that poor people in your area may very well be wanting more of an opportunity to advance, etc... but that doesn't mean that is the standard.

 

[BhamMama]

How can someone living in poverty even own a home in most instances (I know in NO many people lived in public housing "the projects"..in which filing an insurance claim is irrelavent). Then others living in poverty lucky enough to own a home couldn't possibly own a home worth more than 50k or so, right? An insurance co. is not going to pay a claim of 100k for a house worth way less....or they? And I know from experience that contents of a house is a whole different story and additional coverage is needed on a policy(meaning higher $ policy paid by insurer), which if your living in poverty are most likely not going to be able to afford.

They are the working poor. They may have bought a house a long time ago and fell on hard times, may have gone through a government program to buy the house, or it was deeded to them. The amount varies. I've seen those houses nearly falling down outside have the best of things indoors, along with the cars I can't afford either lol

I know some people whos homes had gone up in price and the amount of insurance didn't match, either due to recent construction and not upping it, or just land values. A lot of folks didn't think to up their insurance when it was valued for more. Some just couldn't afford more than the basics so the difference between what the house was really worth and what they could afford to pay for is different. In that instance I'm not sure that they are entitled to the higher prices.

Though I will say, the amount of money offered to some was very different to other areas, along with trying to low ball every one, they did low ball more with certain areas than others. In areas of high concentration of damage they didn't want to pay any more than they thought they could get away with because there were so many. In other areas, they low balled because they thought the damage done wasn't enough to warrent the monies. They offered a friend of mine in Kenner 1500! She had total damage to the whole bottom floor. She had flood insurance and home owners insurance but she was the only one to claim in that area. She fought it and got back what she thought she'd paid for, nothing more. She of course still had many out of pocket expenses due to construction prices going up.

 

[Details]

They've had a ton of fun trying to claim whatever the damage was, was caused by what you weren't insured for. So, if you were insured against storm damage and hurricane damage, they'd find everything destroyed by the levees to be flood damage, and refuse to pay for it. Kinda accurate, kinda misleading though about what you thought you had insured against.

 

[czechmate7]

They offered a friend of mine in Kenner 1500! She had total damage to the whole bottom floor. She had flood insurance and home owners insurance but she was the only one to claim in that area. She fought it and got back what she thought she'd paid for, nothing more. She of course still had many out of pocket expenses due to construction prices going up.

I have cousins in Kenner who had damage also, but it was only 3 or 4 in of water. I know that insurance companies will cover (in most cases) only what was damaged by water and no more (ie..only the portion of wall w/water can be claimed...not the entire wall). I really think it depends on the insurance company also..We were thankful we dropped SF before any of the hurricanes hit here. Also, Kenner was probably one of the least damaged areas which is probably why claims in the area were low.