為何美國(guó)政府收購(gòu)房屋又要銷毀房屋？
Why The U.S. Government Is Buying And Destroying Homes
譯文簡(jiǎn)介
美國(guó)政府正在購(gòu)買并銷毀美國(guó)的房屋。處于洪水泛濫區(qū)的房主們選擇自愿將他們即將面臨危險(xiǎn)的房產(chǎn)出售給政府。
正文翻譯
The U.S. government is buying up and destroying American homes. Homeowners in the floodplain are choosing to voluntarily sell their doomed properties to the government. Since 1989, FEMA has helped fun around 45 to 50,000 home buyouts. FEMA is estimated to have spent somewhere around $4 billion on the project so far but that’s just a fraction of the total amount spend on buyouts, since there are programs outside of FEMA. But not everyone is convinced buyouts are a good idea. Watch the video to find out how floodplain buyouts work and if they are helping or hurting American homeowners.
美國(guó)政府正在購(gòu)買并銷毀美國(guó)的房屋。處于洪水泛濫區(qū)的房主們選擇自愿將他們即將面臨危險(xiǎn)的房產(chǎn)出售給政府。自1989年以來(lái)，F(xiàn)EMA（聯(lián)邦緊急事務(wù)管理局）已經(jīng)幫助處理了大約45,000到50,000套房屋的回購(gòu)。FEMA估計(jì)已經(jīng)在這個(gè)項(xiàng)目上花費(fèi)了約40億美元，該項(xiàng)目已投入 10 億美元，但這只是收購(gòu)總支出的一小部分，因?yàn)檫€有其他項(xiàng)目在FEMA之外。但并不是所有人都認(rèn)為回購(gòu)是一個(gè)好主意。觀看視頻了解洪水泛濫區(qū)的房屋回購(gòu)是如何運(yùn)作的，以及它們是否在幫助或傷害美國(guó)房主。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 4 )
收藏
A perfect storm is brewing in the United States. Housing prices, Inflation, bank collapse, severe drought in the agricultural belt, recession, food shortages, diesel fuel and heating oil shortages, baby formula shortages, available automobile shortages and prices, the price of living place. It's all coming together and it could lead to a real disaster towards this year (or sooner). With inflation currently at about 6%, my primary concern is how to maximize my savings/retirement fund which has been sitting duck since forever with zero to no gains.
美國(guó)正面臨一場(chǎng)完美風(fēng)暴。房?jī)r(jià)、通貨膨脹、銀行倒閉、農(nóng)業(yè)帶嚴(yán)重干旱、經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退、食品短缺、柴油和取暖油短缺、嬰兒奶粉短缺、汽車短缺及其價(jià)格、生活成本等問(wèn)題都在匯聚，這可能在今年（或更早）導(dǎo)致真正的災(zāi)難。考慮到目前的通貨膨脹率約為6%，我主要關(guān)心的是如何最大限度地利用我的儲(chǔ)蓄/退休基金，這些基金一直以來(lái)都處于坐以待斃的狀態(tài)，幾乎沒(méi)有收益。
The fact you can buy a home in a flood zone is insane to me
我覺(jué)得在洪水區(qū)還能買房真是太瘋狂了。
Worry about a housing crisis as a result of consumers paying more than asking for properties when they have little equity. Falling prices might lead to affordability issues and possibly even foreclosures, which would be made worse by future job losses and increased living expenses. I want to spend more than $200K, but I'm not sure how to reduce the risk.
擔(dān)心由于消費(fèi)者在房產(chǎn)上支付高于要價(jià)的價(jià)格而導(dǎo)致的住房危機(jī)，當(dāng)他們幾乎沒(méi)有凈資產(chǎn)時(shí)。房?jī)r(jià)下跌可能導(dǎo)致負(fù)擔(dān)能力問(wèn)題，甚至可能導(dǎo)致喪失抵押品贖回權(quán)，而未來(lái)失業(yè)和生活費(fèi)用增加會(huì)使情況變得更糟。我想花超過(guò)20萬(wàn)美元，但不確定如何降低風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
Houses in flood zone should not be looked at as available housing.
洪水區(qū)的房子不應(yīng)該被視為可用住房。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
When we bought our house we looked at flood maps to make sure we didnt buy in a flood zone. Then also looked at the geography of the area ourselves to make sure it doesn't look likely. So far no problems. People should do this before they buy. Its very American of the mayors to be more concerned about tax revenue than people.
我們買房時(shí)查看了洪水地圖，以確保我們沒(méi)有買在洪水區(qū)。然后還親自查看了該地區(qū)的地理情況，確保房子不太可能被洪水淹沒(méi)。到目前為止沒(méi)有問(wèn)題。人們?cè)谫I房前應(yīng)該這樣做。市長(zhǎng)們更關(guān)心稅收收入而非人們的安全，這真是很美國(guó)的做法。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
The lady they interviewed about the process was a perfect pick. Informed, educated, aware of potential issues, and still it was a very difficult process. We just don't do enough to help people know how much risk their homes are in for floods.
他們采訪的女士是一個(gè)完美的選擇。她了解情況、教育程度高、意識(shí)到潛在問(wèn)題，但過(guò)程仍然非常困難。我們真的沒(méi)有做足夠的工作來(lái)幫助人們了解他們的房屋面臨的洪水風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
One way to do this, to let them know, is to bring their insurance rates up to reflect what the risk is. Money has way of bringing clarity to situations.
一種方法是通過(guò)提高他們的保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)率來(lái)反映風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。這會(huì)讓他們意識(shí)到風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的存在。金錢往往能使情況變得更清晰。
One way to do this, to let them know, is to bring their insurance rates up to reflect what the risk is. Money has way of bringing clarity to situations.
一種方法是提高保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)率以反映風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。這種方式可以讓人們清楚地認(rèn)識(shí)到風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。金錢往往能帶來(lái)清晰的認(rèn)識(shí)。
Same with beachfront properties. With rising sealevels due to man made climate change, those houses are extremely at risk and protecting them from the rising ocean will be very expensive. Rich people can afford dams or other methods to keep away the water, which is why they will probably continue to buy houses on the coast despite climate change, but the rest will have huge problems once the water level rises several feet
海濱地產(chǎn)也是如此。由于人為氣候變化導(dǎo)致海平面上升，這些房屋面臨極高的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，保護(hù)它們免受海洋上升的威脅將非常昂貴。富人可以負(fù)擔(dān)得起建造大壩或其他防護(hù)措施，這就是他們可能會(huì)繼續(xù)購(gòu)買海岸上的房產(chǎn)的原因。而其他人則會(huì)在海平面上升幾英尺后面臨巨大的問(wèn)題。
River Islands outside SF built a giant development in a floodplain. I have photos of it underwater but greedy people ignored impending doom.
舊金山附近的河島在一個(gè)洪水區(qū)建了一個(gè)大型開發(fā)區(qū)。我有它被淹沒(méi)的照片，但貪婪的人們忽視了即將來(lái)臨的災(zāi)難。
The dear lady sharing her relocation story is very pleasant to listen to. I am surprised by how well she recollects almost every step of her journey and knows what she is talking about. Much appreciated!
這位親愛(ài)的女士分享她的搬遷故事，聽著非常愉快。她能夠清晰地回憶起幾乎每一步，并且對(duì)自己所說(shuō)的事情非常了解，令人非常感激！
Feels like a nuanced situation. If folks did not buy/build in a flood zone, but it is in one now, a buyout makes more sense.
However, if folks knew before they bought/built, a buyout makes a lot less sense.
感覺(jué)這是一個(gè)復(fù)雜的情況。如果人們?cè)谫?gòu)買/建造時(shí)并未處于洪水區(qū)，但現(xiàn)在卻在洪水區(qū)，那么買斷就更有意義了。然而，如果人們?cè)谫?gòu)買/建造之前就知道它位于洪水區(qū)，那么買斷的意義就小得多。
Bro people sometimes dont have all the knowledge of something..thats no reason to let them suffer if they can be helped. These things are going to be happening everywhere around all coastlines because of our endless and needless waste and consumption of resources.
兄弟，有時(shí)候人們對(duì)某些事情了解不夠，但這不是讓他們?cè)馐芡纯嗟睦碛?。如果可以提供幫助，就?yīng)該這么做。這些問(wèn)題將會(huì)發(fā)生在所有海岸線周圍，因?yàn)槲覀儫o(wú)盡且不必要的資源浪費(fèi)和消費(fèi)。
Sometimes, the flood plain moves. Rivers have minds of their own and go where they want, regardless of the damage they cause. Also, placed aren't always designated as flood plains if they don't flood often enough or at all in the past. Foe years, my grandparents' house wasn't considered in a flood plain, despite being only about 50 yards from a stream that floods in the winter. Additionally, this information isn't or wasn't available for everyone
有時(shí)候，洪泛區(qū)會(huì)移動(dòng)。河流有自己的“意志”，它們會(huì)按自己的方式流動(dòng)，不管造成多大的損害。此外，如果某個(gè)地方過(guò)去沒(méi)有經(jīng)常被洪水淹沒(méi)，或者根本沒(méi)有被洪水淹沒(méi)，那么它們并不總是被指定為洪泛區(qū)。多年來(lái)，我祖父母的房子沒(méi)有被認(rèn)定為洪泛區(qū)，盡管它離冬天會(huì)洪水的溪流只有大約50碼的距離。此外，這些信息并不總是或曾經(jīng)不對(duì)所有人公開。
Before buying a home, take the time to go online and look at a topographic map. It's fast and free. Higher is better.
在買房之前，花點(diǎn)時(shí)間在線查看一下地形圖。這既快又免費(fèi)。地勢(shì)高的地方更好。
We can do this now, but 20 years ago or even 10 years ago, this wasn't available. Also, I'm pretty sure that many small towns don't have topographical maps available (I know my hometown doesn't have those resources)
我們現(xiàn)在可以做到這一點(diǎn)，但20年前甚至10年前，這些資源是不可用的。此外，我非常確定許多小鎮(zhèn)沒(méi)有地形圖（我知道我的家鄉(xiāng)就沒(méi)有這些資源）。
Generally, it's a good idea. It's safer, prevents governments from having to provide endless disaster relief, and reduces insurance costs for everyone.
通常來(lái)說(shuō)，這個(gè)主意不錯(cuò)。這更安全，防止政府不得不提供無(wú)盡的災(zāi)后援助，也減少了所有人的保險(xiǎn)成本。
The mortgage shock was my first thought. Imagine if you went from a mortgage of sub-3 to a new one that's 7+. That's thousands extra to your monthly. If the mortgage rate and terms could be transferred to the new residence, you might see more buyout acceptance, particularly from those who still have a mortgage.
震驚是我的第一個(gè)想法是抵押貸款。想象一下，如果你從一個(gè)低于3%的貸款利率轉(zhuǎn)到一個(gè)7%以上的新貸款，這意味著每月額外多出幾千塊。如果抵押貸款利率和條件可以轉(zhuǎn)移到新住所，你可能會(huì)看到更多人接受買斷，特別是那些仍有抵押貸款的人。
Government zones to prevent building in flood plains.
Developer ignores zoning, complaining about free market and some bs, insists on building on flood plains.
Developer sells house to American taxpayers
Houses flood
Government buys back houses on flood plains to save Americans taxpayers.
Who's winning in all this?
政府劃定區(qū)域，禁止在洪泛區(qū)建造建筑物。開發(fā)商忽視規(guī)劃，抱怨自由市場(chǎng)和一些廢話，堅(jiān)持在洪泛區(qū)建設(shè)。開發(fā)商將房子賣給美國(guó)納稅人。房子被淹了。政府回購(gòu)洪泛區(qū)的房子以拯救美國(guó)納稅人。在這一切中，誰(shuí)在獲勝？
Any property in a flood zone should not have the option to not buy flood insurance. It shoudl simply be forced and rolled into their property taxes. Why? Becuase they will be given relief even if they dont buy the insurace so we need to force them to buy the insurance.
任何位于洪水區(qū)的物業(yè)都不應(yīng)該有選擇不購(gòu)買洪水保險(xiǎn)的選項(xiàng)。它應(yīng)該被強(qiáng)制并計(jì)入他們的房產(chǎn)稅中。為什么？因?yàn)榧词顾麄儾毁I保險(xiǎn)，也會(huì)獲得救助，所以我們需要強(qiáng)制他們購(gòu)買保險(xiǎn)。
I wonder why we don't move homes more often instead of destroy them. Is it really that much more expensive?
我想知道為什么我們不更頻繁地移動(dòng)房屋，而是選擇摧毀它們。真的要貴那么多嗎？
The homeowner said that her home was not in a flood zone at first. This means that outside activity resulted in her home becoming flood prone. (Charlotte is not coastal) Seems like a just deal in her case.
這位房主說(shuō)她的房子最初不在洪水區(qū)。這意味著外部活動(dòng)導(dǎo)致她的房子變得易于洪水。（夏洛特不是沿海城市）在她的情況下，這似乎是個(gè)公平的交易。
These home owners need to take the buyouts or sign agreements that the government will not bail them out in future flooding events. The purpose here isn't to ensure that they can buy better homes elsewhere. It is to help them get out of a bad situation and to get the taxpayers out having to bail them out every time there is a flood.
這些房主需要接受買斷，或者簽署協(xié)議，政府在未來(lái)的洪水事件中不會(huì)再進(jìn)行救助。目的不是為了確保他們能在其他地方購(gòu)買更好的房子，而是幫助他們擺脫困境，避免納稅人每次發(fā)生洪水時(shí)都要救助他們。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Maybe updating flood maps to include “high risk” areas as flood plains would mean insurance products could be appropriately priced to risk, then that would serve as incentive to not build in those areas. Not really a fan of moral hazard buyouts… especially on properties that haven’t even flooded yet.
也許更新洪水地圖以包括“高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”區(qū)域作為洪泛區(qū)，這樣保險(xiǎn)產(chǎn)品可以根據(jù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)進(jìn)行適當(dāng)定價(jià)，然后這將成為不在這些地區(qū)建設(shè)的激勵(lì)因素。我并不真正支持道德風(fēng)險(xiǎn)收購(gòu)……尤其是那些還沒(méi)有被洪水淹沒(méi)的房產(chǎn)。
There's no way this will be taken advantage of by speculators buying up distressed properties :/
沒(méi)有辦法確保投機(jī)者不會(huì)買入這些困境中的房產(chǎn) :/
Moral Hazard: this artificially encourages risky home purchases in flood plains without financial consequences, unless they require original purchases prior to a past date. If I was in an at risk home I'd take It but this screws up the proper market valuation of climate risk
道德風(fēng)險(xiǎn)：這人為地鼓勵(lì)在洪泛區(qū)進(jìn)行冒險(xiǎn)性的購(gòu)房，沒(méi)有財(cái)務(wù)后果，除非要求原始購(gòu)買在過(guò)去某個(gè)日期之前。如果我在一個(gè)高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的房子里，我會(huì)接受這種買斷，但這會(huì)破壞氣候風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的正確市場(chǎng)估值。
we need to stop using tax players money to pump up housing price. People should losing money from owning a house like in Japan. Housing should not be an investment, it should be treated as consumption. This way house will have limited up side.
If we think housing is an investment. then if people lose their house, it's their own fault that they invested in the wrong area. Do i get my money back if my invest on Apple, but it's losing money this year?
我們需要停止使用納稅人的錢來(lái)推高房?jī)r(jià)。房子應(yīng)該像在日本那樣成為消費(fèi)品，而不是投資。這樣房?jī)r(jià)將有有限的上漲空間。如果我們認(rèn)為住房是一項(xiàng)投資，那么如果人們的房子被淹了，他們應(yīng)該承擔(dān)投資失敗的后果。如果我的蘋果投資今年虧損，我能拿回我的錢嗎？
We need to build more homes!! preferably in areas that are not going to flood
我們需要建造更多的房子!! 盡量在不會(huì)發(fā)生洪水的地區(qū)
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
In the long term this is good for affodability because it lowers risks insurance companies have to take to insure homes. Insurance companies are going to charge unaffordable rates for any homes located in a flood zone. Making the mortgage payments that usually include the insurance unaffordable. Even if the base older home may be cheaper than new construction. Outliers like this cost more than they are worth. Not to mention the health and safty risks of flooding and mold.
從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看，這有利于人們的負(fù)擔(dān)能力，因?yàn)樗档土吮ｋU(xiǎn)公司為房屋投保所承擔(dān)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。保險(xiǎn)公司將對(duì)任何位于洪水區(qū)的房屋收取難以承受的保費(fèi)。這使得通常包括保險(xiǎn)的抵押貸款變得難以承受。即使老房子比新房子便宜。像這樣的異常值的成本高于它們的價(jià)值。更不用說(shuō)洪水和發(fā)霉帶來(lái)的健康和安全風(fēng)險(xiǎn)了。
I know of two federally-subsidized senior housing projects that abut rivers. I would be terrified to live in them. The federal government does have some ability to control ill-advised construction in a flood plain - e.g., by refusing to subsidize rents on any new project built in a flood plain. It also would be cost-effective for the agencies in charge of subsidies to be proactive by demanding (and paying for) remediation to minimize the risk to tenants, perhaps by constructing berms or levees to redirect high water (e.g., on those two projects I just mentioned). In other words, spend a little now to save a lot later.
我知道有兩個(gè)聯(lián)邦補(bǔ)貼的老年人住房項(xiàng)目毗鄰河流。住在里面我會(huì)感到害怕。聯(lián)邦政府確實(shí)有一些控制在洪泛區(qū)進(jìn)行不明智建設(shè)的能力，例如，通過(guò)拒絕補(bǔ)貼任何新建的洪泛區(qū)項(xiàng)目的租金補(bǔ)貼。對(duì)負(fù)責(zé)補(bǔ)貼的機(jī)構(gòu)來(lái)說(shuō)，要求（并支付）補(bǔ)救措施以盡量減少租戶面臨的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，或許可以通過(guò)修建護(hù)堤或堤壩來(lái)轉(zhuǎn)移高水位（例如，在我剛才提到的這兩個(gè)項(xiàng)目中），這也是具有成本效益的。換句話說(shuō)，現(xiàn)在花一點(diǎn)錢，未來(lái)可以節(jié)省很多錢。
take the buyout especially if the water was already up to your frontsteps, mailbox, or car...like who would even pay inflated price for that house knowing the neighborhood is prone to flooding
如果水已經(jīng)漲到你前門臺(tái)階、郵箱或車子的位置，最好接受買斷...誰(shuí)會(huì)愿意以虛高的價(jià)格買那種房子，知道那個(gè)社區(qū)容易發(fā)生洪水。
Do these buy outs extend to large rental operations, I don't feel like they should. I wouldn't mind a house on pillars with a habitat under the house.
這些收購(gòu)是否擴(kuò)展到大型租賃操作，我覺(jué)得不應(yīng)該。我不會(huì)介意在柱子上建一棟房子，房子下面有一個(gè)棲息地。
Why not put in resiliency parks on the bought properties? Hoboken and NYC have helped control flooding events with them
為什么不在買斷的地塊上建立抗洪公園呢？霍博肯和紐約市已經(jīng)通過(guò)這些公園幫助控制洪水事件。
The day after the flood in Hawaii, 1988, the city wanted to clean up the debris along side of the street. I kept the refrigerator for evidence for the insurance claim.
1988年洪水過(guò)后第二天，市政府想清理街道兩旁的廢墟。我保留了冰箱作為保險(xiǎn)索賠的證據(jù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Better buy out large tracts of New Orleans, the older low income housing is sitting on land that is below sea level and strata is shirking inward.
最好買下新奧爾良的大塊土地，因?yàn)槔吓f的低收入住房位于低于海平面的土地上，而地層正在向內(nèi)收縮。
Because so many people overpaid for homes even while loan rates were low, I believe there will be a housing catastrophe because these people are in debt. If housing costs continue to drop and, for whatever reason, they can no longer afford the property and it goes into foreclosure, they have no equity since, even if they try to sell, they will not make any money. I believe that many individuals will experience this, especially given the impending mass layoffs and rapidly rising living expenses.
?由于許多人在貸款利率較低時(shí)仍為房屋支付了過(guò)高的價(jià)格，因此我相信，由于這些人負(fù)債累累，住房災(zāi)難將會(huì)發(fā)生。如果住房成本繼續(xù)下降，無(wú)論出于何種原因，他們?cè)僖操I不起房子，房子被取消贖回權(quán)，他們就沒(méi)有資產(chǎn)，因?yàn)榧词顾麄儑L試出售，也不會(huì)賺錢。我相信許多人將會(huì)經(jīng)歷這種情況，尤其是考慮到即將到來(lái)的大規(guī)模裁員和生活費(fèi)用的快速上漲。
The thing is like yeah some areas are flood prone but they're not like significantly flood prone, then of course you have the historical element.
I think if they're not significantly flood prone than they should then houses have to be raised minimums risk.
Another thing that isn't actually explored is some of this is man-made. When I say this a man-made flood disaster is our streets are not made to absorb water. So this increases the risk of flooding. In areas that would not otherwise have a risk of flooding.
問(wèn)題在于，雖然某些地區(qū)易受洪水影響，但并不是非常嚴(yán)重。然后當(dāng)然還有歷史因素。我認(rèn)為，如果這些地方不那么容易受洪水影響，那么就必須提高房屋的防洪風(fēng)險(xiǎn)等級(jí)。另外，實(shí)際上沒(méi)被探討的一個(gè)方面是，有些洪水災(zāi)害是人為造成的。所謂人為洪水災(zāi)害是我們的街道無(wú)法吸收水分，因此增加了洪水的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。在那些本來(lái)沒(méi)有洪水風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的地區(qū)也是如此。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Why did they build on a flood zone in the first place? I'm pretty sure the river has flooded before so why do we keep building there?
他們?yōu)槭裁匆婚_始要建在洪水泛濫區(qū)？我很確定這條河以前發(fā)生過(guò)洪水，那我們?yōu)槭裁催€要繼續(xù)在那里建房呢？
Old neighborhoods are probably less at risk of flooding, if the homes have been there for 100 year old, the area was safer. It is not a guaranty but it might be one element to consider when choosing a location.
老舊區(qū)可能不太容易遭受洪水侵襲，如果這些房屋已經(jīng)存在了100年，那這個(gè)地區(qū)可能更安全。這不是絕對(duì)保證，但在選擇位置時(shí)可以考慮這一點(diǎn)。
A bad investment decision in many cases doesn't apply to banks. Thus, a bail out.
許多情況下，糟糕的投資決策不適用于銀行，因此需要救助。
This is looking like the lawmakers are using taxpayer money to bailout insurance companies. The only one that benefits financially is the companies that are insuring these homes.
這看起來(lái)像是立法者在用納稅人的錢來(lái)救助保險(xiǎn)公司。唯一從中獲利的財(cái)務(wù)上是那些為這些房屋提供保險(xiǎn)的公司。
Why the goverment provids flood insurance to people that build on the beach or flood plane is stupid. I cannot get goverment flood insurance in my state. If my house washes away so be it. I knew the risk and have enjoyed the view. I read an article about people building in flood plains 50 years ago it was critical of incentives encouraging people to build knowing every 30 years the floods would return.
政府為什么要為在海灘或洪水區(qū)建房的人提供洪水保險(xiǎn)是很愚蠢的。我在我州無(wú)法獲得政府洪水保險(xiǎn)。如果我的房子被沖走，那就這樣吧。我知道風(fēng)險(xiǎn)并且享受了這個(gè)景色。我讀過(guò)一篇關(guān)于50年前在洪水區(qū)建房的文章，批評(píng)了鼓勵(lì)人們?cè)诿?0年洪水會(huì)回來(lái)的地方建房的激勵(lì)措施。
It’s hard to nail down specific predictions for the housing market because it’s not yet clear how quickly or how much the Federal Reserve can bring down inflation and borrowing costs without tanking buyer demand for everything from homes to cars.
很難準(zhǔn)確預(yù)測(cè)房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)的走勢(shì)，因?yàn)檫€不清楚聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備系統(tǒng)能多快或多大程度上降低通貨膨脹和借貸成本，而不會(huì)導(dǎo)致對(duì)從房屋到汽車等各種商品的需求驟降。
never understood people rebuilsing their flooded homes in like the mississippi flood plains or in like hurricane destroyed homes on the east coast especially ones hit twice or three times. id never feel even comfortable
我一直不理解為什么人們會(huì)在像密西西比洪水區(qū)這樣的地方，或者在東海岸被颶風(fēng)摧毀的房屋中重建，尤其是那些被沖擊過(guò)兩三次的地方。我自己絕對(duì)不會(huì)感到舒適。
I do wonder what people will do when insurance providers add additional costs for living in a floodplain. They already are stepping away from Florida's hurricanes and California's wildfires, seems floodplains would be the next step.
我確實(shí)在想，當(dāng)保險(xiǎn)公司對(duì)洪水區(qū)的住房增加額外費(fèi)用時(shí)，人們會(huì)怎么做。他們已經(jīng)開始退出對(duì)佛羅里達(dá)州颶風(fēng)和加州野火的保險(xiǎn)，看來(lái)洪水區(qū)可能是下一個(gè)目標(biāo)。
I think we need to solve the climate crisis before we do the housing one because if we dont then there will be no houses to inhabit
我認(rèn)為我們需要先解決氣候危機(jī)，然后再解決住房危機(jī)，因?yàn)槿绻唤鉀Q氣候危機(jī)，就沒(méi)有房子可住了。
Despite the fact that climate change is occurring, the government is doing the least to prevent it from causing property damage. Also, helping insurers to reduce the increase in their rates. This puts the burden of the cost of climate change on individuals, businesses and governments who are already struggling with the effects of the economic crisis. It is clear, then, that the government needs to take action to mitigate the effects of climate change.
盡管氣候變化正在發(fā)生，但政府在防止其造成財(cái)產(chǎn)損失方面做得最少。同時(shí)，政府也在幫助保險(xiǎn)公司減少他們的費(fèi)用增加。這把氣候變化的成本負(fù)擔(dān)轉(zhuǎn)嫁給了個(gè)人、企業(yè)和已經(jīng)在經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)影響下掙扎的政府。因此，顯然政府需要采取行動(dòng)來(lái)減輕氣候變化的影響。
The insurance companies should be forced to pay for their moves.
保險(xiǎn)公司應(yīng)該被強(qiáng)制賠償他們的行動(dòng)費(fèi)用。
Part of the equation is the fact people have built homes in stupid locations. Its more expensive to keep rebuilding after a flood in these places than to relocate and demolish and block new construction in the problem areas. I work in the damage remediation field, mainly water, so i have seen the aftermath first hand. This includes the river flood in St Louis.
問(wèn)題的一部分在于人們?cè)诓贿m合的地方建房子。洪水過(guò)后，在這些地方繼續(xù)重建比在問(wèn)題地區(qū)重新安置、拆除和阻止新建筑要昂貴得多。我在損害修復(fù)領(lǐng)域工作，主要是水災(zāi)，因此我親眼見過(guò)這種情況，這包括圣路易斯的河水泛濫。
It's not government job to buy homes even if they are located in areas that are prone to natural disaster. Rather use the money to build new housing in areas not prone to natural disasters.
即使房屋位于自然災(zāi)害多發(fā)區(qū)，也不是政府的職責(zé)去購(gòu)買這些房屋。應(yīng)該把錢用來(lái)在不容易發(fā)生自然災(zāi)害的地區(qū)建造新住房。
Climate change has accelerated this process of buying out homeowners in flood and wildfire areas. Life over property is the key reason. Insurance companies are adjusting their rates to keep ahead of future disasters that will decimate communities!
氣候變化加速了對(duì)洪水和野火區(qū)域房主的買斷過(guò)程。生命優(yōu)先于財(cái)產(chǎn)是關(guān)鍵原因。保險(xiǎn)公司正在調(diào)整他們的費(fèi)率，以應(yīng)對(duì)未來(lái)可能摧毀社區(qū)的災(zāi)難！
Too many middle men in these transaction, like anything done by the state or federal side it takes a long time because many entities are touching the money before it gets to where it needs to go, Do an audit on how is spent on adminstrative cost...
這些交易中涉及太多中間人，就像國(guó)家或聯(lián)邦層面上的任何事務(wù)一樣，因?yàn)樵S多實(shí)體在資金到達(dá)需要的地方之前都會(huì)接觸這些錢，所以需要很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間。應(yīng)該對(duì)行政成本的支出進(jìn)行審計(jì)。
We don’t have money to help these people, but we can send 95 billion to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan for war aid . The problem could be fixed with a percent of that money being sent over.
我們沒(méi)有錢幫助這些人，但我們可以向?yàn)蹩颂m、以色列和臺(tái)灣（地區(qū)）提供 950 億美元戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)援助。只需將其中一定比例的資金匯過(guò)去，就可以解決問(wèn)題。
Now it is safe to say that in fact, the possibilities of exploring the world in humans are very limited. They are literally insignificant.
現(xiàn)在可以安全地說(shuō)，人類探索世界的可能性非常有限。他們實(shí)際上微不足道。
So my tax dollars are being funneled to people who bought houses built in insanely dumb locations so that they can then afford to outbid me on other houses.
因此，我的稅款就被用在了那些購(gòu)買了建在極其糟糕地段的房屋的人身上，這樣他們就有能力以高于我的價(jià)格買下其他房屋。
People should not be able to profit from these properties... gov't should pay the last sale price or current floodplain appraised value, whichever is lower. Bad investments should have a negative consequence, not made whole by taxpayer
人們不應(yīng)從這些財(cái)產(chǎn)中獲利……政府應(yīng)支付最后的銷售價(jià)格或當(dāng)前洪泛區(qū)評(píng)估值中的較低者。壞投資應(yīng)該有負(fù)面后果，而不是由納稅人來(lái)彌補(bǔ)。