There are frequent reports from the insurance and reinsurance industry that insured natural catastrophe losses in current dollars have steadily increased over the past several decades. The naive observer takes this as clear evidence that higher CO2 levels correlate with higher insured losses. However, these data sets are not adjusted for real economic growth. When de-trended for nominal GDP growth, insured natural catastrophe losses are more or less flat for the past two decades.
Moreover, US economic growth is heavily skewed to catastrophe-prone areas (Texas, Florida) so in fact economic factors are an even more important driver of rising insured catastrophe losses.
As an aside, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2018 has contributed to these trends by increasing the economic cost of being a resident in a high tax state through the elimination of the SALT deduction. This caused, at the margin, a net migration from high tax states to no-tax states, Florida and Texas being two of the largest.
As you mention, storm intensity is conflated in the popularized narrative with 'economic damage,' which in many cases does not account for economic growth. In simple terms, it should be explained as 'hurricanes are causing more damage because we have constructed more real estate in harm's way.'
Texas is not a no-tax state. It simply doesn't have an income tax. My property taxes on a 55 year old 1700 ft^2 house are now about 10% of my gross income. That's before we discuss sales tax.
Another brilliant analysis, Matthew. I don't know how you manage to stay so based - I would be enraged and it would come through the writing right out of the page. I see on Twitter how they attack you and you stay calm there too. Keep talking - we will win this eventually! :))
Empirical evidence matters not to those invested in the scam.
JFK's "... ask not, what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"
is still true today. But the selfish ambitions of mankind lead to waste and fraud being perpetuated for personal gain. Whether for power, money, fame, or a combination of all three, AGW proponents
Dr. W, thank you for good, solid, well reasoned data delivered in a gentlemanly way. We need more light and less heat on CO2. While the truth is obvious to me, it isn’t to many. Cold, sober facts delivered in a calm, objective manner will eventually win the day. 👍
There are frequent reports from the insurance and reinsurance industry that insured natural catastrophe losses in current dollars have steadily increased over the past several decades. The naive observer takes this as clear evidence that higher CO2 levels correlate with higher insured losses. However, these data sets are not adjusted for real economic growth. When de-trended for nominal GDP growth, insured natural catastrophe losses are more or less flat for the past two decades.
Moreover, US economic growth is heavily skewed to catastrophe-prone areas (Texas, Florida) so in fact economic factors are an even more important driver of rising insured catastrophe losses.
As an aside, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2018 has contributed to these trends by increasing the economic cost of being a resident in a high tax state through the elimination of the SALT deduction. This caused, at the margin, a net migration from high tax states to no-tax states, Florida and Texas being two of the largest.
There is also no increase in tropical storms nor in their intensity: https://www.wildhorsewisdom.xyz/p/stormy-weather?r=31a4ti&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
As you mention, storm intensity is conflated in the popularized narrative with 'economic damage,' which in many cases does not account for economic growth. In simple terms, it should be explained as 'hurricanes are causing more damage because we have constructed more real estate in harm's way.'
Texas is not a no-tax state. It simply doesn't have an income tax. My property taxes on a 55 year old 1700 ft^2 house are now about 10% of my gross income. That's before we discuss sales tax.
You are correct of course. But here in New York we have high income taxes, high property taxes, AND high sales taxes!
Another brilliant analysis, Matthew. I don't know how you manage to stay so based - I would be enraged and it would come through the writing right out of the page. I see on Twitter how they attack you and you stay calm there too. Keep talking - we will win this eventually! :))
Little message like this make it worth while... Thank you for the kind words.
And of course Roger Pielke, Jr., https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/global-disasters-a-remarkable-story?utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
Co2 = fear
Empirical evidence matters not to those invested in the scam.
JFK's "... ask not, what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"
is still true today. But the selfish ambitions of mankind lead to waste and fraud being perpetuated for personal gain. Whether for power, money, fame, or a combination of all three, AGW proponents
continue to prosper at the expense of the many.
Yep. As Professor Mariani has shown https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17477891.2023.2239807
AGW is the biggest hoax of the century. And it has delivered More waste and suffering than can be quantified. Shame on u you he
Marxist science deniers
Dr. W, thank you for good, solid, well reasoned data delivered in a gentlemanly way. We need more light and less heat on CO2. While the truth is obvious to me, it isn’t to many. Cold, sober facts delivered in a calm, objective manner will eventually win the day. 👍