Everything You Hear About Billion-Dollar Disasters Is Wrong

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,781
62,635
2,605
Right coast, classified
upload_2019-11-9_21-41-18.png


Fake news is all the America hating left have.

Everything You Hear About Billion-Dollar Disasters Is Wrong
 
I'm surprised 2010 is so low, I thought the cost of the Deep Water Horizon incident was higher ... 2009 we were in the depths Great Recession, are folks losing their homes not a hazard ... 1989 was the Exxon Valdez incident ... what about the trillions we spend on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? ... the trillions we gave BankAmerica? ... PG&E liabilities? ...

The link requires me to disable some blocking software ... what's Forbes vested interest in this report? ... are the numbers adjusted for inflation? ... which form of GDP are they using? ... is this all losses or just insured losses? ...

Kind regards to Benjamin Disraeli ...
 

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

In the $1.5B - $5B range.
 
Welll exoect that to curve up when global warming causes cities to be drowned......uuummmmm…...uuummmm mm
 

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

In the $1.5B - $5B range.
Yep. But what you hear from environazis is it’s gone fro $5B to $91B in 40 years, even though they are identical numbers adjusted for inflation.
 

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

In the $1.5B - $5B range.
Yep. But what you hear from environazis is it’s gone fro $5B to $91B in 40 years, even though they are identical numbers adjusted for inflation.
I dunno.

I'm just giving an edumacated guesstimate based on what the inflation of the dollar compared to gold may have been, even though I didn't look up the actual numbers.

Why gold?

Maybe because the value of gold has been quite stable for centuries. Basically, an ounce of gold has the same buying power as it did 2000 years ago in many respects. For example, 2000 years ago for an ounce of gold you could get a decent quality formal outfit including tunic, toga, undergarments and boots or sandals. And for the price of an ounce of gold these days you would get about the equivalent of the same today (suit, pants, shirt, tie, shoes, underwear).
 
Last edited:

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

Close to the same it was in 1973.
 

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

In the $1.5B - $5B range.
Yep. But what you hear from environazis is it’s gone fro $5B to $91B in 40 years, even though they are identical numbers adjusted for inflation.

Then you have State and local costs, loss of business cost, loss of income from employees effected by business closures, added consumer costs.
 

Natural disasters cost $91 billion in 2018, according to federal report

Then we have early winter in the mid and upper Midwest with increased taxpayer cost.

But the good news......78 in Vegas today!
$91B was how much in 1972?

In the $1.5B - $5B range.
Yep. But what you hear from environazis is it’s gone fro $5B to $91B in 40 years, even though they are identical numbers adjusted for inflation.
I dunno.

I'm just giving an edumacated guesstimate based on what the inflation of the dollar compared to gold may have been, even though I didn't look up the actual numbers.

Why gold?

Maybe because the value of gold has been quite stable for centuries. Basically, an ounce of gold has the same buying power as it did 2000 years ago in many respects. For example, 2000 years ago for an ounce of gold you could get a decent quality formal outfit including tunic, toga, undergarments and boots or sandals. And for the price of an ounce of gold these days you would get about the equivalent of the same today (suit, pants, shirt, tie, shoes, underwear).

Something to ponder.....

Four Reasons Why Gold Is A Bad Investment
 

Forum List

Back
Top