Many insurance carriers enjoy a robust business. As an example, UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, headquartered in Minnesota, had about $185 million in sales in 2017 and employed approximately 230,000 people. Still, as an industry report from the business research company Hoovers established, insurers of all stripes, health or auto or property or anything else, face two major hurdles. First, they "are increasingly subject to a large number of regulations and reporting requirements by states. Consequently, some insurers have withdrawn from states that impose burdensome requirements." Second, large-scale "claims have become more common, creating problematic concentrations of risk for individual insurers. . . . And some risks can be large enough to drive insurers out of business or cause them to curtail services offered, increase rates, or leave states where risk is highest." Thus, profits can be high within the industry, but so can payouts in the aftermath of major catastrophes. The report goes on to say that "floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes" produce the riskiest economic circumstances for the industry. Consequently, states in which these weather events are more commonAlabama, Florida, and North Carolinahave seen some carriers cease business operations within them.

Discussion post of minimum 200 wrds answering the following questions:

• In selecting coverage and setting prices, how does an insurance company choose the ethical balance between making a reasonable profit and risking catastrophic losses of its own?
• Should the law require that carriers offer property insurance in states where harsh natural disasters occur? Or should federal and state monies be used to subsidize insurance companies' resources in these circumstances? In each case, why or why not?