Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Earth

Climate Crisis On Track To Destroy Capitalism, Warns Top Insurer (theguardian.com) 197

The climate crisis is on track to destroy capitalism, a top insurer has warned, with the vast cost of extreme weather impacts leaving the financial sector unable to operate. From a report: The world is fast approaching temperature levels where insurers will no longer be able to offer cover for many climate risks, said Günther Thallinger, on the board of Allianz SE, one of the world's biggest insurance companies. He said that without insurance, which is already being pulled in some places, many other financial services become unviable, from mortgages to investments.

Global carbon emissions are still rising and current policies will result in a rise in global temperature between 2.2C and 3.4C above pre-industrial levels. The damage at 3C will be so great that governments will be unable to provide financial bailouts and it will be impossible to adapt to many climate impacts, said Thallinger, who is also the chair of the German company's investment board and was previously CEO of Allianz Investment Management. The core business of the insurance industry is risk management and it has long taken the dangers of global heating very seriously. In recent reports, Aviva said extreme weather damages for the decade to 2023 hit $2tn, while GallagherRE said the figure was $400bn in 2024. Zurich said it was "essential" to hit net zero by 2050.

Climate Crisis On Track To Destroy Capitalism, Warns Top Insurer

Comments Filter:
  • DTs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:22PM (#65279117)
    Trump will do that first.
  • by DesScorp ( 410532 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:31PM (#65279133) Journal

    The Guardian: "Climate Crisis will destroy Capitalism"

    Guardian Readers: "Pass me more coal! That fire ain't big enough!"

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:43PM (#65279167)
    Summary Publicly Traded Status: Only Allstate among the major US homeowners insurance companies is publicly traded on a US exchange. Farmers is part of the publicly traded Zurich Insurance Group, but the others (State Farm, USAA, Liberty Mutual) are mutual companies.

    Q1 2024 YOY Earnings: Allstate reported strong YOY earnings growth in Q1 2024, with revenue up 10.7% to $15.3 billion and net income at $1.4 billion. For the non-publicly traded companies, specific earnings are not publicly available, but industry data showing a 13% rise in premiums and improved loss ratios suggests a generally positive performance.

    Easy to call BS on this story. And I live in CA; major insurers threaten to pull out all the time, but this is their TACTIC to get permission from state regulators to RAISE RATES.

    AC post 'cus I'm modding.

    GROK didn't quite get my query but above was good enough to post.
    • And I live in CA; major insurers threaten to pull out all the time, but this is their TACTIC to get permission from state regulators to RAISE RATES.

      It might seem like NBD in California where wildfires and mudslides have always been a regular thing, and earthquakes aren't affected by climate change. Here in Florida though, where we're getting slammed with at least one devastating hurricane (and huge expenses to clean up the mess) nearly every year, insurers actually are making good on their threats to get outta Dodge.

      Not that I have any tears to shed for the insurance industry (bunch of scumbags, the whole lot of 'em), but the entire scheme only works

      • A lot of home insurers have actually left California. They didn't want to operate in a market where they couldn't sell worthless insurance to old people.

        It's not working out great, but they do have a point. Our building and zoning laws allowed people to build a bunch of flammable structures close enough to each other that they could easily catch one another on fire. In large part this was done to enable our lumber industry. Instead of the broken window fallacy, it's the burnt shit shack fallacy. I live in o

    • by Zocalo ( 252965 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @03:06PM (#65279231) Homepage
      Insurers are undeniably greedy bastards that, like casinos, absolutely have a thumb on the scales to ensure things turn out in their favour. It's kind of their business model, afterall. To do that optimally, they need to be completely on top of the odds of having to pay out so they can offer a competetive premium in markets where it's usually trivial to compare quotes and pick the cheapest that meets a client's needs with a few clicks on a market comparison website. If they're starting to get nervous and actually backing that up with actions as opposed to just making a song and dance to raise premiums for more profits (there's no profit if there's no policy), then they are probably correct that the data backs up making the decision.

      The predicted knock-on effects about no mortgages without insurance also seem quite plausible; losing your home without insurance is very likely to lead to bankruptcy, and that means the mortgage provider likely gets the short end of the stick too - even after clawing back what they can from whatever assets are left. I'm not so sure I'd say it will eventually lead to the collapse of the entire financial system because it had more facets than that and would almost certainly adapt (a big part of the insurer's part of it however...), but it does seem highly likely to cause massive upheaval during any adaptation which is going to have an impact on everyone.

      And yet here we are, still mostly voting in leaders on agendas of doing all they can to make the problem worse rather than doing whatever they can to try and solve what they can and buy more time for their successors to try and deal with the rest. While we're all in this together, at some point it's going to turn into everyone for themselves (probably when mass climate change induced migration starts), and when that happens it's going to get very ugly, very fast.
      • Pretty much this. I have raised this point on several occasions and a lot of people just scoffed at it. It's very simple, if you can't get insurance or if the premium is exorbitant in a particular area - move ASAP. The alternative, as you mentioned, is a high chance of loosing everything and going bankrupt.

        • Good advice for the unencumbered. Less so for those who own property. If you can't get reasonable insurance, neither can a buyer.

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:46PM (#65279175)
    We already have a fundamental breakdown in capitalism going on right now. All regulation necessary for capitalism to be functional is being stripped away. The networks of free trade required for the system to function are also being broken down so that the oligarchs can build little fiefdoms where they control everything absolutely.

    At the rate we are going we are going to be a kleptocracy long before climate change breaks down our civilization. Techno feudalism
    • Actually maybe this is what Musk and Co. are doing...

      They can see the collapse and expect it to go in similar way to Roman Empire - with feudal structure they can have full control of....

      • Are going to find themselves taken out brutally by actual oligarchs. Assuming they get the oligarchy they are clearly shooting for. They are not nearly clever enough to survive actual unprotected court intrigue like you get in a feudal system.

        I suppose Trump will probably die before it comes to that. But you never know he comes from a ridiculously long-lived family.

        Just one of the things that really pisses me off about this world is people do not take into account just how valuable it is to come fr
  • by JeffSh ( 71237 ) <[jeffslashdot] [at] [m0m0.org]> on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:51PM (#65279185)

    Climate change is real and it will raise costs for insurance, but the real driver behind raising costs for insurance is the inflationary monetary supply. The cost to insure a building is far higher in 2025 than it was in 1980, not because its more likely to be destroyed but because the cost for replacement is so much higher. The labor isnt there, the materials arent there, all of the economic value has been sucked out of the economy and replaced with air.

    • by evanh ( 627108 )

      There can be a cause and effect between the two. Global Warming creates more damage so thereby requiring far more effort to both maintain and rebuild, and therefore raises the costs of everything, including insurance.

      During the pandemic I heard an interesting take on what creates inflationary pressure. Often it is due simply to supply shortages. If there is money available but the supply is suddenly restricted, what remains commands a premium. This is considered inflationary when affecting broad categor

  • Thus of little real interest to our politicians. Yes: some of the better ones, and better countries; are doing things but they get a lot of flack from their political opposition -- especially the right. Far too many just lie about it.

  • by RossCWilliams ( 5513152 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @02:52PM (#65279197)
    I think what you are hearing is that there are lots risks to investments that could turn out to be worthless. "Capitalism" relies on those losses being widely shared through insurance and government bailouts. Insurance companies are faced with far greater risks in the future and higher costs in the short run. They aren't going to be able to make good on all their promises and its unlikely governments will be able to bail them out or the people they insured. I doubt that is the end of capitalism, but it may be the end of some capitalists' individual wealth.
  • ...so there was no investment or capitalism before insurance?

    Pretty sure that'd be a fucking surprise to the Assyrian merchants trundling all over Mesopotamia ca 1400bc.

  • “We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.” — Ursula K. Le Guin

    Thank you Mother Nature for giving us a hand.
  • Insurance is a parasite. It was never necessary for capitalism to succeed. The burden of insurance distorts the market so much, it would be a great relief if it were to fail. Of course, it would destroy our economy as we know it, but capitalism would persist.

    • Re:As We Know It (Score:5, Informative)

      by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @03:17PM (#65279247)

      Insurance is a fundamental necessity for any system with private ownership. It allows risk to be shared so that everyone pays a little bit to protect them against bad luck wiping them out economically. It is fundamentally the same as the concept of a company, or investing in a business venture - multiple people coordinating their resource use to allow them to achieve things no individual otherwise could.

      Without it, the big projects only happen under despotic rulership and that's really not great for the average person.

      • by PPH ( 736903 )

        It allows risk to be shared

        It allows risk to be securitized. All you have to do to protect yourself is to diversify your portfolio. There is no evidence that CDSs [wikipedia.org] were ever a good buy, aside from being bundled with garbage mortgage backed securities in order to con the market and get better bond ratings.

        In 2008, they should have made anyone expecting payment on a CDS to bring in the underlying defaulted security as proof of insurable interest. Otherwise, it's like buying fire insurance on your neighbor's house and waiting for it to

        • While I won't claim it happens in practice, especially for the 'big' players gaming the system, the fundamentals of insurance include, 'you can only insure a pre-existing risk' (so you shouldn't be able to get a policy to insure your next game of poker before entering a casino), and 'you can't get insurance on someone else's risk' (like a fire policy on someone else's real estate when you don't have a personal stake in it).

          Of course, if you let finance bros near the regulators and legislators, and it's a ma

        • How does diversifying your portfolio protect you from your house burning down or being blown over?

          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward

            You just go live in one of your other houses. Or you can sell some of your massive stock holdings and buy another one.
            Sheesh... poor people are soo dumb. /s

          • by sconeu ( 64226 )

            Obviously you're supposed to own multiple houses, in different parts of the country.

          • by PPH ( 736903 )

            You have enough wealth in other forms to move or rebuild.

    • Without insurance, the non wealthy couldn't afford the risk of things like buying a house (or a car for many), or getting sick.

  • In that case ... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @03:23PM (#65279255)

    ... I'd expect all the left-wing commie Marxists to run out and buy diesel bro-trucks. To help hasten capitalism's demise.

    They already burn down businesses and generate all the associated greenhouse gasses.

  • Our current policy is to not only increase the greenhouse gas content every year but to increase the rate of increase of greenhouse gas content every year. This policy does not have some magical asymptote at 3.4C. They do not seem to understand the difference between de-facto policy and non-binding agreements grounded in fantasy. Our current policy is that we are setting the stage for a very warm planet for the people being born today to live in.
    • And yet, none on those complaining the most are willing to cancel commercial air travel. Quite the opposite.

      "As the industry moves into a new era of growth, the airport industry must focus on financial viability, operational efficiency, and sustainability. From 2024 to 2043, global passenger traffic is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3.4% to reach 17.7 billion passengers. Based on the latest data, long-term forecasts now estimate a loss of 3 to 4 years of growth potential in glo

  • by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @03:25PM (#65279261)

    Capitalism is a lovely motivational system for a few generations, until the wealth concentration is too great.

    That's why to make it last, you need a regulated market that includes a wealth tax to prevent the runaway wealth concentration issue. And why you need a decent education system so the population understands why it's necessary. And a combination of responsible free speech and a free press to keep everyone up to date on those who are trying to subvert the system. And an adversarial legal system divorced from the political system. And a proper democracy to allow the population to throw out bad leaders.

    When you allow obscene wealth concentration, you get a handful of people who can control speech, kill education, subvert the law, and end democracy. Any civics teacher or historian could tell you that... but you have to be willing to listen.

  • The insurance companies didn't say it will destroy capitalism. Places with increased risk due to climate change won't be suitable for investing in. If you can't get insurance at a reasonable rate then what you are doing is to risky. You aren't entitled to cheap insurance especially if you are doing something risky. You aren't entitled to a mortgage or any other secured borrowing especially if the lenders think your collateral could be destroyed.
  • by Zak3056 ( 69287 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @03:46PM (#65279289) Journal

    The damage at 3C will be so great that governments will be unable to provide financial bailouts and it will be impossible to adapt to many climate impacts

    If "the damage is so great that governments will be able to provide bailouts" then this suggests that whatever "ism" you choose to mention is going to be equally fucked, here. So why are the alarm bells ringing for capitalism in particular? Is socialism going to somehow magically solve this problem?

    • Nah.

      "Despotism" will do just fine; Warlord Bob isn't going to bail you out when your crop fails, he's just going to order you beaten until morale improves.

    • by az-saguaro ( 1231754 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @06:17PM (#65279637)

      then this suggests that whatever "ism" you choose to mention is going to be equally fucked

      You are completely correct, but I think that applies to catastrophic scenarios. A major climate apocalypse will stress the ability to respond and and recover, and it doesn't matter what system of government or banking is involved.

      I think there has to be a distinction between catastrophic events and responses - versus - "life as usual" under a new set of rules and constraints. In the article ( https://www.theguardian.com/en... [theguardian.com] ) I think that is what they were implying when they said:

      The climate crisis is on track to destroy capitalism ... with the vast cost of extreme weather impacts leaving the financial sector unable to operate

      Even without acute catastrophic events (earthquake, hurricane, tornado, flood, fires, etc.), climate change will increase predictable or anticipated risks. For certain projects like a new housing development or a business district in such and such area, or insuring farmers' crops in certain areas, the risks of failure will be so predictably high that an insurer knows it could not meet the payout if disaster struck - it would bankrupt them. So, they cannot take on that account.

      For capitalism, an investor hopes that the project they fund succeeds, and everybody profits. They also accept risk of failure for business and market factors - such is the nature of venture capitalism. But, if the enterprise is wiped by unanticipated natural disaster, that is where insurance comes in. And, if the insurance companies cannot insure a project because such risks are so high, then the investors may think twice about committing capital to a venture. No investment, no ventures, then no new projects, no progress (ironically, even possibly for businesses that might fix the climate problems). Individuals who lose houses or businesses are then bankrupted because of no recovery money - on a large scale.

      For major catastrophe, you are right, no -ism may be able to support a recovery. But, for slow, regular, metered small doses of disaster, we may be at a tipping points where they are too big or too frequent for the insurers to pay, and that will affect capital development, at least in some sectors.

  • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Thursday April 03, 2025 @04:05PM (#65279333)

    "We've been raking in profits and overcapitalising our risk for decades. Get ready to bail us out if something goes wrong, we've already taken all the money!"

  • oh wait capitalism has seen all of them off as well.
  • Somehow it seems like every crisis can only be solved by abolishing capitalism. Over-population, ozone hole, incipient ice age, global warming, uh, sorry, climate change. You name it.

    ...laura

  • "It would still be possible to provide insurance but we would no longer be able to make unreasonable, horrendous profits in the process, so we're out."

  • He said that without insurance, which is already being pulled in some places, many other financial services become unviable, from mortgages to investments.,/quote>

    Oh noes! I can't build a mansion on the South Carolina dunes. Or along the crumbling cliff sides along the Pacific Coast highway. The system is just so unfair!

  • Nothing gives one confidence in a site like its ability to correctly display the text of the summaries of its own stories.
  • ...Mad Max fiefdom companies?

System restarting, wait...

Working...