It has become apparent that Ron Paul is not truly thinking through the practical applications of his political dogma. Why? Let's look at one particular sentence: "If the insurance [company] won't sell it to you, it means it's too dangerous." So if the insurance company won't sell insurance to you, you should move! The problem with this is the fact that without government help and regulation, many of America's flood-prone areas, essentially, any place that's flat and near a river, would have zero flood insurance. Here's why the government stepped in: In 1968 the U.S. Congress established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to address the nation’s flood exposure and challenges inherent in financing and managing flood risks in the private sector. Private insurance companies at the time claimed that the flood peril was uninsurable and, therefore, could not be underwritten in the private insurance market.
What does Ron Paul think about the National Flood Insurance Program? "But I have opposed, you know, flood insurance since I’ve been in Congress for 30 years, since 1976."
So he thinks it would be better to keep the government out of the matter, despite the fact that much of the land on either side of the Mississippi would likely become suddenly uninsurable. If no one could live near the river, then how would it be managed? How would we be able to bring the majority of the nation's grain exports to the river, that it may be shipped overseas? How would the absolutely crucial locks be operated if no one can live nearby to operate them? That, and an interruption of the river's traffic would "cost the U.S. economy hundreds of millions of dollars for every day of idled barges carrying coal, timber, iron, steel and more than half of America’s grain exports."
Obviously, Ron Paul didn't think things through. He didn't consider the permutations of his dogma were it to be implemented. And it doesn't stop there, in 2007, Scientific American reported, "In South Carolina private companies have stopped insuring homes valued at less than $500,000. In Rhode Island some agencies have refused to cover any coastal properties. Allstate, one of the largest residential property insurers on the east coast, elected not to renew 30,000 policies covering coastal properties in New York City, Long Island, Westchester County and Connecticut, and is considering reducing coastal area coverage in Massachusetts and along the Gulf."