When you start quoting 'lesswrong' links to support idiotic libertarian positions that somehow magically make the cynical attempt to try to profit from others misery look like charity you can count me out.
This is not how you deal with a natural disaster. But to get that you'd first have to understand the principle of solidarity. Hint: you can't buy it on the free market.
It's ironic you accuse me of having "idiotic libertarian positions" when all you've done is repeat your point and not addressing any of my points.
>This is not how you deal with a natural disaster. But to get that you'd first have to understand the principle of solidarity.
Going back to the original question, how should we deal with it? It'll be great if the government or some private benefactor decided to make those people whole. I'm not against that. However, if that's not an option, rich people putting in "unfair offer" is less bad than the alternative.
So you admit that rich people putting in offers to buy the houses puts the homeowners in a better situation economically, but that doesn't matter because... feelings? I don't know about you, but personally I'd rather be in a warm house in Oklahoma, than homeless but with better feelings. If anything, if I was thinking clearly (ie. I didn't think the false options existed), I'd be furious if people like you prevented those offers from coming in (from lobbying governments to enact laws, for instance) because they thought they knew better than me.
This is not how you deal with a natural disaster. But to get that you'd first have to understand the principle of solidarity. Hint: you can't buy it on the free market.