I always have my properties insured even if the coverage only covers catastrophic events.

Part of this is that if something catastrophic (but not total loss) happens, I don't want an insurance company telling me how much they will/won't pay based on the age of my systems. 

Hey @Cesar Egas, I responded to Miranda's post on this but essentially I do replacement cost because I don't want to have to worry about the out of pocket cost to replace items if something is catastrophic but not a total loss.

We were glad that we went with a smaller home knowing that if something catastrophic happened (*knock on wood*), we wouldn't be pushed into foreclosure. 

This is financially catastrophic for me, but I am not asking charity from anyone.  

Negotiate really hard and get the deal that works for you.The other really important thing I would say is this; most catastrophic investment decisions, whether it be property, stocks or business decisions are made inside EXACTLY this type of crucible - the investor is excited and doesn't want to miss out on a great deal - the deal of a lifetime.

You can make your inspection contingency languate much more palatable however, by phrasing it like this:Version 1 for new investors - Buyer agrees to limit their inspection repair requests to major electrical, plumbing, foundation, structural, and environmental issues.Version 2 for savvy investors - Buyer agrees to limit their inspection repair requests to catastrophic electrical, plumbing, foundation, structural, and environmental issues.Both versions give you leeway to define what is "major" or "catastrophic" so you always have an out, but it also shows the seller that you aren't going to tic-tack them with cosmetic repair requests.No realtor should EVER suggest you waive inspection, even if it were a good idea.

Follow this link and scroll down to the bottom of the page and you'll see that, in spite of historically catastrophic financial events like the dot com bubble, 9-11 terror attack, and the housing bubble the S&P 500 has a 25-year annualized return of over 11%. 

The connectivity of the population is what is driving the disease, however the catastrophic estimates of hospitalizations and bed use assumes that we have a certain percentage of severe cases which is probably much higher in the model than in reality.

I've been reading so much about people arguing back and forth between gold, silver, USD, bitcoin, real property etc about what might be the better hedge or store of value in catastrophic economic conditions.