Lots of us shake our heads when people build homes on the seashore, sometimes on stilts. Eventually, a storm comes and wipes them out, and the owners act surprised and insist on rebuilding. It's worse when we have to contribute to the insurance premiums to make that happen.
Mike
I agree completely that people should not be surprised when they place their home in a high-hazard area (coastline, wildfire, flood zone, volcano, etc) and the "impossible" happens and wrecks their home.
I like the concept of "spread of risk" by having all parties share a bit to help those unfortunate enough to suffer catastrophe. But this concept should not act as an enticement for risky behavior such as continued development in high-risk areas.
One little homeowner insurance tidbit I find encouraging is that if your home is destroyed, the carrier pays the replacement cost but that does NOT mean you have to rebuild the house where it stood. You can rebuild the house pretty much anywhere else if you so desire. I think some folks took advantage of that after recent disasters (wildfire, flood, quake, etc)
