I don’t understand this line of reasoning. If someone’s house burns down, the insurance company pays them for the replacement cost of the home, not the home AND land. This won’t give them anywhere near enough to pay off their mortgages. They are left with an expensive plot of raw land that nobody would buy, just enough money to rebuild the home, their original mortgage debt, and no place to live (although insurance should pay for a rental while they rebuild). How does this bail them out?
