Palisades Fire - Los Angeles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Are these the same Resnicks from the OJ trial?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching a lot of the news and struck by how the celebrity/mansion /multimillion dollar homes aspect of the story is pushed. There are also lots of people who have lived there for decades and have otherwise typical middle class lives who have lost homes or are at risk.

My stepmother home is gone. 1800 sq ft 2 bdrm that she bought in 1975 for 78k. She was dropped by her insurer last year and was in the process of getting fair plan insurance and they were taking forever to underwrite. She and my dad moved to a retirement community (fortunately)but she kept her home and had been thinking about renting, selling etc.

My mom’s home (and my childhood home) is now in mandatory evacuation zone. They bought a small ranch in 1972 for 68k and she stayed. It is very modest home for the neighborhood but there are many others like it. Fortunately I got my mom to leave recently and move close to me and rent it out because she could no longer live alone (dementia)…(my sibling refused to sell because of taxes, which was stupid. I wanted her to have easy access to capital so she could get the best care… I have been worried about fire since a 2019 wildfire which was a very close call and she was at that time developing dementia and I knew she would not know what to do the next time.)

The house is her only asset and the rent pays for memory care. I’m thankful she’s not there and aware of what’s happening.

My stepsister is on the edge of the evacuation zone, in a modest home with a couple animals. She is a researcher and can only afford to live there because her dad (a schoolteacher) left her the home when he died. She’s nervous like everyone else and is currently housing a friend who probably lost their home in topanga.

I’m grateful that everyone in my family is ok but I just don’t know what all these people will do. The super rich will have options but for many people those options are simply out of reach.

Someone who purchased a home in what is now a VERY expensive neighborhood is doing extremely well. $78k?! Let me guess, the home is at least $2 million?

Sorry but middle class people don’t live in 2 million dollar properties.

In positive news the land value is way more than the structure

This isn’t right when the person is older and has owned the home for a long time. My parents purchased a home (my childhood home) in a different part of the country for $65,000 in 1978. My parents were middle class and self-employed, and now in their early 80s live on an extremely fixed income (it’s incredible to me how little they spend day to day, but normal to them as they are a different generation that doesn’t stop at starbucks and Wendy’s every time they feel a craving) and have medicare of course.

They still live in that house which is worth $1.5m today. They benefit from reduced property taxes because of their ages and length of time they’ve owned the house, and don’t upkeep it very well - these two factors permit them to financially stay in the house. They aren’t poor of course because they have the house, but they would be financially devastated if they lost the house in a fire and had to move out long term. They are solidly middle class but for an asset that they don’t plan to touch until needed for elder care ($1.5m won’t go far to support 2 people in assisted living who potentially could live almost 20 more years).

Prop 13 capped the amount the taxes could pay each year. These people are literally paying peanuts off the backs of younger hard working families who also want a place on the property ladder. It is completely unjust. And they get to pass that on one time to a child? Eff that.

Perhaps they should cut spending for the asinine woke programs and especially cut funding for the "undocumented".

I's been clear for decades people aren't paying their fair share. For people who keep voting for generous benefits it's galling that they personally don't want to pay for them and want new arrivals and younger people to foot the bill. It's gross.

The elderly shouldn’t pay taxes at all. Most of them haven’t had a salary increase since 1980. What do you want them to pay all of their income to the tax man? The elderly aren’t a nuisance.

The elderly aren’t all working so they don’t oay income taxes.

Everybody pays income taxes if they are earning an income.
Age has nothing to do with it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching a lot of the news and struck by how the celebrity/mansion /multimillion dollar homes aspect of the story is pushed. There are also lots of people who have lived there for decades and have otherwise typical middle class lives who have lost homes or are at risk.

My stepmother home is gone. 1800 sq ft 2 bdrm that she bought in 1975 for 78k. She was dropped by her insurer last year and was in the process of getting fair plan insurance and they were taking forever to underwrite. She and my dad moved to a retirement community (fortunately)but she kept her home and had been thinking about renting, selling etc.

My mom’s home (and my childhood home) is now in mandatory evacuation zone. They bought a small ranch in 1972 for 68k and she stayed. It is very modest home for the neighborhood but there are many others like it. Fortunately I got my mom to leave recently and move close to me and rent it out because she could no longer live alone (dementia)…(my sibling refused to sell because of taxes, which was stupid. I wanted her to have easy access to capital so she could get the best care… I have been worried about fire since a 2019 wildfire which was a very close call and she was at that time developing dementia and I knew she would not know what to do the next time.)

The house is her only asset and the rent pays for memory care. I’m thankful she’s not there and aware of what’s happening.

My stepsister is on the edge of the evacuation zone, in a modest home with a couple animals. She is a researcher and can only afford to live there because her dad (a schoolteacher) left her the home when he died. She’s nervous like everyone else and is currently housing a friend who probably lost their home in topanga.

I’m grateful that everyone in my family is ok but I just don’t know what all these people will do. The super rich will have options but for many people those options are simply out of reach.

Someone who purchased a home in what is now a VERY expensive neighborhood is doing extremely well. $78k?! Let me guess, the home is at least $2 million?

Sorry but middle class people don’t live in 2 million dollar properties.

In positive news the land value is way more than the structure

This isn’t right when the person is older and has owned the home for a long time. My parents purchased a home (my childhood home) in a different part of the country for $65,000 in 1978. My parents were middle class and self-employed, and now in their early 80s live on an extremely fixed income (it’s incredible to me how little they spend day to day, but normal to them as they are a different generation that doesn’t stop at starbucks and Wendy’s every time they feel a craving) and have medicare of course.

They still live in that house which is worth $1.5m today. They benefit from reduced property taxes because of their ages and length of time they’ve owned the house, and don’t upkeep it very well - these two factors permit them to financially stay in the house. They aren’t poor of course because they have the house, but they would be financially devastated if they lost the house in a fire and had to move out long term. They are solidly middle class but for an asset that they don’t plan to touch until needed for elder care ($1.5m won’t go far to support 2 people in assisted living who potentially could live almost 20 more years).

Prop 13 capped the amount the taxes could pay each year. These people are literally paying peanuts off the backs of younger hard working families who also want a place on the property ladder. It is completely unjust. And they get to pass that on one time to a child? Eff that.

Perhaps they should cut spending for the asinine woke programs and especially cut funding for the "undocumented".

I's been clear for decades people aren't paying their fair share. For people who keep voting for generous benefits it's galling that they personally don't want to pay for them and want new arrivals and younger people to foot the bill. It's gross.

The elderly shouldn’t pay taxes at all. Most of them haven’t had a salary increase since 1980. What do you want them to pay all of their income to the tax man? The elderly aren’t a nuisance.

The elderly aren’t all working so they don’t oay income taxes.

lol please tell that to the IRS because my pockets indicate that is a lie

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching a lot of the news and struck by how the celebrity/mansion /multimillion dollar homes aspect of the story is pushed. There are also lots of people who have lived there for decades and have otherwise typical middle class lives who have lost homes or are at risk.

My stepmother home is gone. 1800 sq ft 2 bdrm that she bought in 1975 for 78k. She was dropped by her insurer last year and was in the process of getting fair plan insurance and they were taking forever to underwrite. She and my dad moved to a retirement community (fortunately)but she kept her home and had been thinking about renting, selling etc.

My mom’s home (and my childhood home) is now in mandatory evacuation zone. They bought a small ranch in 1972 for 68k and she stayed. It is very modest home for the neighborhood but there are many others like it. Fortunately I got my mom to leave recently and move close to me and rent it out because she could no longer live alone (dementia)…(my sibling refused to sell because of taxes, which was stupid. I wanted her to have easy access to capital so she could get the best care… I have been worried about fire since a 2019 wildfire which was a very close call and she was at that time developing dementia and I knew she would not know what to do the next time.)

The house is her only asset and the rent pays for memory care. I’m thankful she’s not there and aware of what’s happening.

My stepsister is on the edge of the evacuation zone, in a modest home with a couple animals. She is a researcher and can only afford to live there because her dad (a schoolteacher) left her the home when he died. She’s nervous like everyone else and is currently housing a friend who probably lost their home in topanga.

I’m grateful that everyone in my family is ok but I just don’t know what all these people will do. The super rich will have options but for many people those options are simply out of reach.

Someone who purchased a home in what is now a VERY expensive neighborhood is doing extremely well. $78k?! Let me guess, the home is at least $2 million?

Sorry but middle class people don’t live in 2 million dollar properties.

In positive news the land value is way more than the structure

This isn’t right when the person is older and has owned the home for a long time. My parents purchased a home (my childhood home) in a different part of the country for $65,000 in 1978. My parents were middle class and self-employed, and now in their early 80s live on an extremely fixed income (it’s incredible to me how little they spend day to day, but normal to them as they are a different generation that doesn’t stop at starbucks and Wendy’s every time they feel a craving) and have medicare of course.

They still live in that house which is worth $1.5m today. They benefit from reduced property taxes because of their ages and length of time they’ve owned the house, and don’t upkeep it very well - these two factors permit them to financially stay in the house. They aren’t poor of course because they have the house, but they would be financially devastated if they lost the house in a fire and had to move out long term. They are solidly middle class but for an asset that they don’t plan to touch until needed for elder care ($1.5m won’t go far to support 2 people in assisted living who potentially could live almost 20 more years).

Prop 13 capped the amount the taxes could pay each year. These people are literally paying peanuts off the backs of younger hard working families who also want a place on the property ladder. It is completely unjust. And they get to pass that on one time to a child? Eff that.

Perhaps they should cut spending for the asinine woke programs and especially cut funding for the "undocumented".

I's been clear for decades people aren't paying their fair share. For people who keep voting for generous benefits it's galling that they personally don't want to pay for them and want new arrivals and younger people to foot the bill. It's gross.

The elderly shouldn’t pay taxes at all. Most of them haven’t had a salary increase since 1980. What do you want them to pay all of their income to the tax man? The elderly aren’t a nuisance.

The elderly aren’t all working so they don’t oay income taxes.

lol please tell that to the IRS because my pockets indicate that is a lie

If you have income then it doesn't matter if you are elderly. Why should you get a break over younger working people who have less savings and more mouths to feed and more dependents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching a lot of the news and struck by how the celebrity/mansion /multimillion dollar homes aspect of the story is pushed. There are also lots of people who have lived there for decades and have otherwise typical middle class lives who have lost homes or are at risk.

My stepmother home is gone. 1800 sq ft 2 bdrm that she bought in 1975 for 78k. She was dropped by her insurer last year and was in the process of getting fair plan insurance and they were taking forever to underwrite. She and my dad moved to a retirement community (fortunately)but she kept her home and had been thinking about renting, selling etc.

My mom’s home (and my childhood home) is now in mandatory evacuation zone. They bought a small ranch in 1972 for 68k and she stayed. It is very modest home for the neighborhood but there are many others like it. Fortunately I got my mom to leave recently and move close to me and rent it out because she could no longer live alone (dementia)…(my sibling refused to sell because of taxes, which was stupid. I wanted her to have easy access to capital so she could get the best care… I have been worried about fire since a 2019 wildfire which was a very close call and she was at that time developing dementia and I knew she would not know what to do the next time.)

The house is her only asset and the rent pays for memory care. I’m thankful she’s not there and aware of what’s happening.

My stepsister is on the edge of the evacuation zone, in a modest home with a couple animals. She is a researcher and can only afford to live there because her dad (a schoolteacher) left her the home when he died. She’s nervous like everyone else and is currently housing a friend who probably lost their home in topanga.

I’m grateful that everyone in my family is ok but I just don’t know what all these people will do. The super rich will have options but for many people those options are simply out of reach.

Someone who purchased a home in what is now a VERY expensive neighborhood is doing extremely well. $78k?! Let me guess, the home is at least $2 million?

Sorry but middle class people don’t live in 2 million dollar properties.

In positive news the land value is way more than the structure

This isn’t right when the person is older and has owned the home for a long time. My parents purchased a home (my childhood home) in a different part of the country for $65,000 in 1978. My parents were middle class and self-employed, and now in their early 80s live on an extremely fixed income (it’s incredible to me how little they spend day to day, but normal to them as they are a different generation that doesn’t stop at starbucks and Wendy’s every time they feel a craving) and have medicare of course.

They still live in that house which is worth $1.5m today. They benefit from reduced property taxes because of their ages and length of time they’ve owned the house, and don’t upkeep it very well - these two factors permit them to financially stay in the house. They aren’t poor of course because they have the house, but they would be financially devastated if they lost the house in a fire and had to move out long term. They are solidly middle class but for an asset that they don’t plan to touch until needed for elder care ($1.5m won’t go far to support 2 people in assisted living who potentially could live almost 20 more years).

Prop 13 capped the amount the taxes could pay each year. These people are literally paying peanuts off the backs of younger hard working families who also want a place on the property ladder. It is completely unjust. And they get to pass that on one time to a child? Eff that.

Perhaps they should cut spending for the asinine woke programs and especially cut funding for the "undocumented".

I's been clear for decades people aren't paying their fair share. For people who keep voting for generous benefits it's galling that they personally don't want to pay for them and want new arrivals and younger people to foot the bill. It's gross.

The elderly shouldn’t pay taxes at all. Most of them haven’t had a salary increase since 1980. What do you want them to pay all of their income to the tax man? The elderly aren’t a nuisance.

The elderly aren’t all working so they don’t oay income taxes.

Everybody pays income taxes if they are earning an income.
Age has nothing to do with it

Obviously. The elderly with no income don't. Not sure why PP things the working elderly should be treated specially. What is unique about their situation?

[Anonymous]

Thank God the felon is going to CA on Friday! He said CA can't end the fires because they're incompetent, but he is going and will do it. So, folks, the fires will be extinguished on Friday. Hooray!

(Does seem strange since he has the tendency to inflame everyone, but he's said it's happening, so by golly it will! Hopefully he'll throw some pens too.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don't seem to understand that Pacific Palisades, Hollywood Hills, and Malibu are not at all normal neighborhoods in need of policy solutions that would address 99.9% of the rest of the country. These are ultra luxury houses owned by people who can either cover the cost of replacement without much trouble or people who have lived there long enough to be locked into extremely low public tax rates and affordable home insurance. They could have used their savings from taxes over the years to buy additional insurance or put that money into accounts for savings or to cover unexpected costs like these.

California's governors and mayors should also have been planning for emergencies and the priority of needed public safety measures. The results of poor leadership and planning are on display.

Actually California is top in the nation for emergency preparedness due to the climate changing and geography. There are fights between developers and the state about building on coastal bluffs that fall into the ocean. There are fights between people who own houses teetering on coastal bluffs that want to stay.

Climate change sucks. A lot more of the US and world is going to be destroyed.

The Santa Anna winds have been around since the beginning of time. Dirty politicians have not, that's where the blame lies.

It hasn't rained in LA in 8 months. That is not normal

So the potential for catastrophic fires should have been noted by leaders in govt.

Do you think the state of California should be watering forests and scrubland? The potential was noted and there were warnings

Increase water reservoirs? Increase number of firefighters and equipment? Take other helpful measures? Not ask for budget cuts? Not be absent and traveling?

Would a public spanking by Daddy Trump suffice to end your braying? Y'all hate taxes.....remember?

Why is Trump always brought up as a defense? I agree with this post and I never voted for him and can't stand him. And people in LA/CA pay plenty of taxes.

Because NONE of what the OP is suggesting would've mattered in the face of 100mph Santa Ana winds and no rain for 8 months. Those are acts of god. You could've doubled the LAFD budget, bought 100 more engines, open 3 new reservoirs China-style in 3 months....and it would not have mattered. At all.

How is this not sinking into your skulls? It was biblical.

-SoCal born & raised

This is simply untrue. You do not know better than firefighters, local officials interviewed who said there were shortages of trucks, limits on overtime, not enough resources allocated to respond optimally, that the infrastructure is old. It would not have stopped the winds but it would have helped the response.

Holy crap, they do PREPARE. They prepared. Were there limits on overtime this week? Uh no. They recalled all firefighters who were off-duty. They actually do preventative brush clearing in all of these communities to the best of their abilities.

You're basically demanding an unlimited budget....yet you all hate taxes. Nothing you says makes any logical sense.

Lies. They didn’t do this. They said Trump is stupid for even suggesting it. I was literally just in pacific palisades on vacation and kindling was everywhere

This! People in LA used to make fun of Trump for bringing up the lack of controlled burns.

It’s almost like he’s correct about everything.

The recent LA fires are not in a forest so this is not an issue of land management. The fires were set by arsonists and the wind made it impossible to control. This fire event was not caused by excessive fuels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don't seem to understand that Pacific Palisades, Hollywood Hills, and Malibu are not at all normal neighborhoods in need of policy solutions that would address 99.9% of the rest of the country. These are ultra luxury houses owned by people who can either cover the cost of replacement without much trouble or people who have lived there long enough to be locked into extremely low public tax rates and affordable home insurance. They could have used their savings from taxes over the years to buy additional insurance or put that money into accounts for savings or to cover unexpected costs like these.

California's governors and mayors should also have been planning for emergencies and the priority of needed public safety measures. The results of poor leadership and planning are on display.

Actually California is top in the nation for emergency preparedness due to the climate changing and geography. There are fights between developers and the state about building on coastal bluffs that fall into the ocean. There are fights between people who own houses teetering on coastal bluffs that want to stay.

Climate change sucks. A lot more of the US and world is going to be destroyed.

The Santa Anna winds have been around since the beginning of time. Dirty politicians have not, that's where the blame lies.

It hasn't rained in LA in 8 months. That is not normal

So the potential for catastrophic fires should have been noted by leaders in govt.

Do you think the state of California should be watering forests and scrubland? The potential was noted and there were warnings

Increase water reservoirs? Increase number of firefighters and equipment? Take other helpful measures? Not ask for budget cuts? Not be absent and traveling?

Would a public spanking by Daddy Trump suffice to end your braying? Y'all hate taxes.....remember?

Why is Trump always brought up as a defense? I agree with this post and I never voted for him and can't stand him. And people in LA/CA pay plenty of taxes.

Because NONE of what the OP is suggesting would've mattered in the face of 100mph Santa Ana winds and no rain for 8 months. Those are acts of god. You could've doubled the LAFD budget, bought 100 more engines, open 3 new reservoirs China-style in 3 months....and it would not have mattered. At all.

How is this not sinking into your skulls? It was biblical.

-SoCal born & raised

This is simply untrue. You do not know better than firefighters, local officials interviewed who said there were shortages of trucks, limits on overtime, not enough resources allocated to respond optimally, that the infrastructure is old. It would not have stopped the winds but it would have helped the response.

Holy crap, they do PREPARE. They prepared. Were there limits on overtime this week? Uh no. They recalled all firefighters who were off-duty. They actually do preventative brush clearing in all of these communities to the best of their abilities.

You're basically demanding an unlimited budget....yet you all hate taxes. Nothing you says makes any logical sense.

Lies. They didn’t do this. They said Trump is stupid for even suggesting it. I was literally just in pacific palisades on vacation and kindling was everywhere

This! People in LA used to make fun of Trump for bringing up the lack of controlled burns.

It’s almost like he’s correct about everything.

The recent LA fires are not in a forest so this is not an issue of land management. The fires were set by arsonists and the wind made it impossible to control. This fire event was not caused by excessive fuels.

In fact, excessive fuels couldve solved the fire event. Deforestation/burning dead trees, dead leaves, and dry brush is needed just like Native Americans used to do but the environmentalists are against burning a dead leaf.

Dead trees/dry brush are as dry as a match. They're dangerous. It's weird how its expected to cut your grass and mow your lawn or garden yet these lefties dont think an actual forest needs fueling/removal of dead fall.

Fish were given all of the water and ice melt from Vancouver, not LA County because according to Newsom and his party, the Pacific Ocean's fish needs the water more than drought-prone Southern Cal residents.

[Anonymous]

I'm so glad the FEMA coverage is getting removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don't seem to understand that Pacific Palisades, Hollywood Hills, and Malibu are not at all normal neighborhoods in need of policy solutions that would address 99.9% of the rest of the country. These are ultra luxury houses owned by people who can either cover the cost of replacement without much trouble or people who have lived there long enough to be locked into extremely low public tax rates and affordable home insurance. They could have used their savings from taxes over the years to buy additional insurance or put that money into accounts for savings or to cover unexpected costs like these.

California's governors and mayors should also have been planning for emergencies and the priority of needed public safety measures. The results of poor leadership and planning are on display.

Actually California is top in the nation for emergency preparedness due to the climate changing and geography. There are fights between developers and the state about building on coastal bluffs that fall into the ocean. There are fights between people who own houses teetering on coastal bluffs that want to stay.

Climate change sucks. A lot more of the US and world is going to be destroyed.

The Santa Anna winds have been around since the beginning of time. Dirty politicians have not, that's where the blame lies.

It hasn't rained in LA in 8 months. That is not normal

So the potential for catastrophic fires should have been noted by leaders in govt.

Do you think the state of California should be watering forests and scrubland? The potential was noted and there were warnings

Increase water reservoirs? Increase number of firefighters and equipment? Take other helpful measures? Not ask for budget cuts? Not be absent and traveling?

Would a public spanking by Daddy Trump suffice to end your braying? Y'all hate taxes.....remember?

Why is Trump always brought up as a defense? I agree with this post and I never voted for him and can't stand him. And people in LA/CA pay plenty of taxes.

Because NONE of what the OP is suggesting would've mattered in the face of 100mph Santa Ana winds and no rain for 8 months. Those are acts of god. You could've doubled the LAFD budget, bought 100 more engines, open 3 new reservoirs China-style in 3 months....and it would not have mattered. At all.

How is this not sinking into your skulls? It was biblical.

-SoCal born & raised

This is simply untrue. You do not know better than firefighters, local officials interviewed who said there were shortages of trucks, limits on overtime, not enough resources allocated to respond optimally, that the infrastructure is old. It would not have stopped the winds but it would have helped the response.

Holy crap, they do PREPARE. They prepared. Were there limits on overtime this week? Uh no. They recalled all firefighters who were off-duty. They actually do preventative brush clearing in all of these communities to the best of their abilities.

You're basically demanding an unlimited budget....yet you all hate taxes. Nothing you says makes any logical sense.

Lies. They didn’t do this. They said Trump is stupid for even suggesting it. I was literally just in pacific palisades on vacation and kindling was everywhere

This! People in LA used to make fun of Trump for bringing up the lack of controlled burns.

It’s almost like he’s correct about everything.

A log of wood should not be set on fire. Fish in the ocean are in need of more water than humans are.

Plant lives matter more than babies do. Burning is unnatural and ruining the environment.

I guess the idea that carbon is the footprint of life, CO2 is used in greenhouses to grow vegetation, and it is what plants/trees actually eat and need for photosynthesis goes beyond the understanding of the leftist environmentalists. Fireplace ash is used as fertilizer for a reason. There is a symbiotic exchange and circle of life. Carbon, fossil fuels, and the environment were never at odds.

[Anonymous]

California should naturally burn 20,000,000 acres a year.

In a weird way putting out the fires hurts the land and its natural balance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:California should naturally burn 20,000,000 acres a year.

In a weird way putting out the fires hurts the land and its natural balance.

The problem is the rich live out in the secluded woods but the homeless want to eat the rich. SO many of these fires are from the homeless or anarchists angry at the rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don't seem to understand that Pacific Palisades, Hollywood Hills, and Malibu are not at all normal neighborhoods in need of policy solutions that would address 99.9% of the rest of the country. These are ultra luxury houses owned by people who can either cover the cost of replacement without much trouble or people who have lived there long enough to be locked into extremely low public tax rates and affordable home insurance. They could have used their savings from taxes over the years to buy additional insurance or put that money into accounts for savings or to cover unexpected costs like these.

California's governors and mayors should also have been planning for emergencies and the priority of needed public safety measures. The results of poor leadership and planning are on display.

Actually California is top in the nation for emergency preparedness due to the climate changing and geography. There are fights between developers and the state about building on coastal bluffs that fall into the ocean. There are fights between people who own houses teetering on coastal bluffs that want to stay.

Climate change sucks. A lot more of the US and world is going to be destroyed.

The Santa Anna winds have been around since the beginning of time. Dirty politicians have not, that's where the blame lies.

It hasn't rained in LA in 8 months. That is not normal

So the potential for catastrophic fires should have been noted by leaders in govt.

Do you think the state of California should be watering forests and scrubland? The potential was noted and there were warnings

Increase water reservoirs? Increase number of firefighters and equipment? Take other helpful measures? Not ask for budget cuts? Not be absent and traveling?

Would a public spanking by Daddy Trump suffice to end your braying? Y'all hate taxes.....remember?

Why is Trump always brought up as a defense? I agree with this post and I never voted for him and can't stand him. And people in LA/CA pay plenty of taxes.

Because NONE of what the OP is suggesting would've mattered in the face of 100mph Santa Ana winds and no rain for 8 months. Those are acts of god. You could've doubled the LAFD budget, bought 100 more engines, open 3 new reservoirs China-style in 3 months....and it would not have mattered. At all.

How is this not sinking into your skulls? It was biblical.

-SoCal born & raised

This is simply untrue. You do not know better than firefighters, local officials interviewed who said there were shortages of trucks, limits on overtime, not enough resources allocated to respond optimally, that the infrastructure is old. It would not have stopped the winds but it would have helped the response.

Holy crap, they do PREPARE. They prepared. Were there limits on overtime this week? Uh no. They recalled all firefighters who were off-duty. They actually do preventative brush clearing in all of these communities to the best of their abilities.

You're basically demanding an unlimited budget....yet you all hate taxes. Nothing you says makes any logical sense.

Lies. They didn’t do this. They said Trump is stupid for even suggesting it. I was literally just in pacific palisades on vacation and kindling was everywhere

This! People in LA used to make fun of Trump for bringing up the lack of controlled burns.

It’s almost like he’s correct about everything.

The recent LA fires are not in a forest so this is not an issue of land management. The fires were set by arsonists and the wind made it impossible to control. This fire event was not caused by excessive fuels.

In fact, excessive fuels couldve solved the fire event. Deforestation/burning dead trees, dead leaves, and dry brush is needed just like Native Americans used to do but the environmentalists are against burning a dead leaf.

Dead trees/dry brush are as dry as a match. They're dangerous. It's weird how its expected to cut your grass and mow your lawn or garden yet these lefties dont think an actual forest needs fueling/removal of dead fall.

Fish were given all of the water and ice melt from Vancouver, not LA County because according to Newsom and his party, the Pacific Ocean's fish needs the water more than drought-prone Southern Cal residents.

This has been debunked repeatedly.

This thread is a dumpster fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don't seem to understand that Pacific Palisades, Hollywood Hills, and Malibu are not at all normal neighborhoods in need of policy solutions that would address 99.9% of the rest of the country. These are ultra luxury houses owned by people who can either cover the cost of replacement without much trouble or people who have lived there long enough to be locked into extremely low public tax rates and affordable home insurance. They could have used their savings from taxes over the years to buy additional insurance or put that money into accounts for savings or to cover unexpected costs like these.

California's governors and mayors should also have been planning for emergencies and the priority of needed public safety measures. The results of poor leadership and planning are on display.

Actually California is top in the nation for emergency preparedness due to the climate changing and geography. There are fights between developers and the state about building on coastal bluffs that fall into the ocean. There are fights between people who own houses teetering on coastal bluffs that want to stay.

Climate change sucks. A lot more of the US and world is going to be destroyed.

The Santa Anna winds have been around since the beginning of time. Dirty politicians have not, that's where the blame lies.

It hasn't rained in LA in 8 months. That is not normal

So the potential for catastrophic fires should have been noted by leaders in govt.

Do you think the state of California should be watering forests and scrubland? The potential was noted and there were warnings

Increase water reservoirs? Increase number of firefighters and equipment? Take other helpful measures? Not ask for budget cuts? Not be absent and traveling?

Would a public spanking by Daddy Trump suffice to end your braying? Y'all hate taxes.....remember?

Why is Trump always brought up as a defense? I agree with this post and I never voted for him and can't stand him. And people in LA/CA pay plenty of taxes.

Because NONE of what the OP is suggesting would've mattered in the face of 100mph Santa Ana winds and no rain for 8 months. Those are acts of god. You could've doubled the LAFD budget, bought 100 more engines, open 3 new reservoirs China-style in 3 months....and it would not have mattered. At all.

How is this not sinking into your skulls? It was biblical.

-SoCal born & raised

This is simply untrue. You do not know better than firefighters, local officials interviewed who said there were shortages of trucks, limits on overtime, not enough resources allocated to respond optimally, that the infrastructure is old. It would not have stopped the winds but it would have helped the response.

Holy crap, they do PREPARE. They prepared. Were there limits on overtime this week? Uh no. They recalled all firefighters who were off-duty. They actually do preventative brush clearing in all of these communities to the best of their abilities.

You're basically demanding an unlimited budget....yet you all hate taxes. Nothing you says makes any logical sense.

Lies. They didn’t do this. They said Trump is stupid for even suggesting it. I was literally just in pacific palisades on vacation and kindling was everywhere

This! People in LA used to make fun of Trump for bringing up the lack of controlled burns.

It’s almost like he’s correct about everything.

The recent LA fires are not in a forest so this is not an issue of land management. The fires were set by arsonists and the wind made it impossible to control. This fire event was not caused by excessive fuels.

In fact, excessive fuels couldve solved the fire event. Deforestation/burning dead trees, dead leaves, and dry brush is needed just like Native Americans used to do but the environmentalists are against burning a dead leaf.

Dead trees/dry brush are as dry as a match. They're dangerous. It's weird how its expected to cut your grass and mow your lawn or garden yet these lefties dont think an actual forest needs fueling/removal of dead fall.

Fish were given all of the water and ice melt from Vancouver, not LA County because according to Newsom and his party, the Pacific Ocean's fish needs the water more than drought-prone Southern Cal residents.

This has been debunked repeatedly.

This thread is a dumpster fire.

It’s not debunked. People don’t want to admit Trump was right and Newsom was wrong. Controlled burns, deforestation, desalination plants, collecting ice melt and rain water are valuable steps to avoid disaster and billions in damage. Why should the lives of trees and fish take precedence over human life and property?

[Anonymous]

Too many people for the land. It's no harder than this. Why do we all want to make this so complicated???!

So the choice is - people get out if building smack dab in the forest cause you'll be first to burn or 2 - if you gotta be there, build done fire proof houses.

Done.

All the other stuff might help might not help gas probes attached to it, etc. you can argue about policies, wait for approval forever on policies, debate policies ad museum and nothing happens.

At the end of the day it's simply not enough resources, too many people. Everywhere. Won't get better. Move or stay and find a way to survive.