Pommy Dan

i have simply expressed an opinion referring to the thread title.

i dont have to need an expert on bush fires to do that.

by the same token do you have to be an expert to say they are NOT idiots?

Pommy Dan

[QUOTE=Three Legs;7280825]Can you fire me off a cheque QUOTE]

bit insensitive choise of words, innit?

ABCDiamond

That UK £330,000,000 figure was quoted in March 2005.
The figures that I had were as at 5th Jan 2005, just 10 days after the event. More money would have come in, from all counties after that date.

I found a later figure of $240million from Australians on Feb 5th 2005 (or $12 per person)

I found the March date from a website that quoted the £330,000,000 figure, which also mentioned the Governement contributions:

Fleaflyfloflum

I would hazard a guess that many of the poorer people up there were renting. If thats the case, build the homes, rent them out but with complusory insurance added onto the rent. If they qualify for centrelink then take it out of that. Controversial maybe, but for those who say they must be insured its one option

ABCDiamond

I think that the donations could be used for such help, but I don't think that Governments should use tax payers money to replace houses that people chose not to insure.

We don't know the financial situation of any of those people, they may have been able to afford it, and chose not to. If they could have afforded it, then why should we pay premiums to cover ourselves, PLUS more to cover them.

We also don't know the values of these properties, some of them looked a bit expensive, and if they could afford the house, then another few hundred a year for insurance shouldn't hurt.

Too many variable to answer this fully..

ABCDiamond

If they are renting, then they haven't actually lost a home, "from the financial aspect". Most landlords would have insurance, and be able to rebuild.

Fleaflyfloflum

No, but i am talking about everything else they have lost.

jond

But if they don't work how did they pay their mortgage/rent in the first place?

If they were already living on benefits then surely it would have to be the States responsiblity to rehouse them wouldn't it. I suppose there would have to be exceptions, pensioners etc.

John

Fleaflyfloflum

I honestly dont know. Never had anything to do with benefits here. I do remember seeing on TV that governement housing is practically impossible to get nowadays with people on waiting lists for years.
Yes, i am referring to pensioners, disabled people etc.

Dont get me wrong, if someone is living down there in a big flash house but cant be bothered to get insurance then they really should be made to pay up for any aid they receive, but i still dont believe they should be left to rot in the bush!!

ozzieeagle

We live in a unique climate, I've just given this idea some deeper thought. Maybe the Government could legislate that if there is a major bushfire, how they would define that I dont know. Then houses could be replaced gratis for all affected people. Irrespective of whether people are insured or not. Almost a national insurance type of situation if you like, which only applies to Bushfires.

This would take the inequality out of the equation. This way premiums could be lower for people in the bush for normal house fires.

It's just an idea.

MTPockets

Crikey ABCD I've never known anybody with such a love of random statistics - especially of the pro-australian kind, which is fair enough but getting a little predictable.

Anyway, the 'which country is more/less generous' debate - bit of a pointless one though given the bigger picture. I don't think houses should be built for free as in the long run it will be counter-productive for fire insurance and promoting eqaulity. That money could be better spent on investing in community initiatives that affect everybody like schools, clinics, the fire service etc, but there will be a lot of people needing some help, so maybe the cheap loan or similar is a good idea.

ozzieeagle

Feel free to supply pro UK stats, and that applies to anyone.

Most people really enjoy ABCD's stats, they are one of my highlites on this board.

jond

What about a basic level of compulsory insurance, don't know how they would enforce it though

ABCDiamond

Hang on, I don't like paying my insurance either, how about the government just covers all of us ?

I also have friends who pay higher car insurance for some reason that doesn't really apply them, could they set up a scheme for them too...

Pandora's box is opening....

MartinLuther

Sorry, when I made that post I failed to predict the admission you made later



Just wondering. Do you know that they're called Op Shops in Aus rather than Charity Shops?