Comment by Panzer04

Agree to disagree.

The "human hand" guiding outcomes still needs to get it's resources from somewhere, presumably from government tax income. I disagree this will necessarily result in better global outcomes than the free market.

In cases where almost everyone agrees people should always have access to a service (healthcare) I think it does make sense to obligate everyone to pay. I don't think it makes sense in this specific case of wildfire insurance.

The free market here seems to be failing by your definition because it can't make money. To me that's it succeeding. It's demonstrating that it's underpriced, and people being unwilling to pay the necessary prices shows that they need to find somewhere else to live.

Amusingly enough, the lack of housing itself is another problem caused mostly by human-guided hands in government, not the free market. Enlightened despotism always sounds great when they agree with your perspectives, the reality is rarely so smooth.