Ain’t that grand?

Nine of the top ten risks according to a major insurance company are due to climate change

Look at how many problems we’ve solved – poverty, in fact all matters economic and social are dealt with. What a glorious thing free market capitalism is, eh?

10 thoughts on “Ain’t that grand?”

  1. *rolls eyes*

    It’s not a list of a ‘top ten’. It’s two lists. The first five are likelihood and the second five impact.

  2. I think Richard Murphy has done an excellent job summarizing both the article and its source reports. I know everyone round here repeatedly tears him a new one at least once a week, but I think in fairness the piece does quite a good job conveying the information as it aligns with his worldview (oh alright – what he thinks this week. Happy now?).

    Having said that I disagree completely with the source material, and the further you get from it, the more it screams “global catastrophe”, rather than “here are some examples of problems caused by the loss of biodiversity”.

    And the reasons I think that are 1) If Zurich and especially the Pharma were that concerned about losing a vital ingredient in their drugs, they’d be doing something about it (planting and tending more Axolotls)., and 2) Get woke, go broke – I have a hard time believing that an insurance company that’s been around for as long as they have is blind to the risks and the financial costs associated with ignoring them. I don’t think they’ve abandoned risk profiling the traditional (economic) risks, but they have augmented them with green/gw concerns, sensing another rich seam of revenue.

    I strongly suspect – but can’t prove – that this has largely been published to pander to the spoilt child and her hordes (“Look at us! We’re onboard with your message”) and what they do behind closed doors is largely business as usual.

  3. Could it be, Justin, that they sense a way of jacking up premiums? Who wouldn’t be prepared to pay a little bit extra for some flood or rhino extinction insurance?

  4. So according to this ‘report’ climate/environmental risks are more likely than data fraud or cyber attack

    Given that reports of cyber attacks and data fraud are happening more or less all of the time how can they possibly be more likely than extreme weather events which by definition are rare, otherwise they wouldn’t be extreme, they would be normal

    At this stage I can safely declare that the rest of this report is bollox

  5. Dennis, Climate-Change Denying Fruitcake

    It’s not a list of a ‘top ten’. It’s two lists. The first five are likelihood and the second five impact.

    Yep. And note that “Climate Action Failure” isn’t a discrete event – it isn’t even defined.

    This isn’t science; it’s corporate public relations for use by leftists.

    And Marsh & McLellan isn’t an insurance company. What insurance related businesses it involves itself in are insurance brokerage, reinsurance services, and risk management.

  6. Bloke in North Dorset

    The ever changing lists confirm what most of us think, they’re making it up as they go along.

    Anyway, insurance companies getting involved will be good thing. If an insurance company jacks up premiums for something to virtue signal we can be sure another will nip in to make a bit of money. Eventually the insurance businesses will give us a true idea of the risks and costs of climate change.

  7. @Justin

    I strongly suspect – but can’t prove – that this has largely been published to pander to the spoilt child and her hordes (“Look at us! We’re onboard with your message”) and what they do behind closed doors is largely business as usual

    Correct. One of the Davos lot said as much after Trump & the Greta puppet speeches – revealed preferences

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *