Palisades Fire - Los Angeles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Makes you wonder if it is an act of terrorism. You don't need a dirty bomb or something huge to cause massive destruction. Something as small as purposefully throwing a cigarette onto dry brush can in CA can now cause mass destruction and massive financial pain for the whole country.

Especially if your government has completely abdicated on any fuel reduction activities.

California already has more hybrid and EV’s than any state in the country.

Psst: they are still denying climate change. All they care about are a few weeds in an area they've said is way overcrowded. They think there are no other factors than the brush they imagine is choking the whole landscape there. The winds are not an issue. The climate is not an issue.

Are you denying climate change if you rebuild in a high risk fire zone?

What should be done about the vast numbers of structures on the New Madrid fault, none of which are built to withstand even a mild earthquake? What should be done about Texas and its failed power grid. At least 365 people died directly from heat in Texas last year, so what about that? Your line of thinking leads to the conclusion that no one can live anywhere.

Your hysterics lead you to that conclusion. But it's pretty clear LA is becoming increasingly inhospitable in a way the majority of other places aren't.

DP but what hysterics? It is factual and well-documented that the Midwest is completely unprepared for a massive earthquake and in fact they have chosen not to strengthen building codes.

"no one can live anywhere!" Is pretty hysterical.

The DARVO is strong with you. You made the outrageous claim about Californians not rebuilding. I pointed out that there is no “safe” place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born and raised in LA and I could care less about these fires.
LA is grown so much in last 40 years there are people over consuming the water of 5 states and building in geographical areas that are nearly inaccessible for a response by heavy equipment.

Let it burn and limit rebuilding to 1 out 10 homes.
Maybe people will move from a freaking natural desert not sustainable for mass
Human populations.

At least 5 people are dead. Thousands are suffering trauma you can’t imagine. Try to act like you at least have cognitive empathy.

Check your water statements. Do you want California agriculture to stop? That’s where the majority of the water goes. It’s not a population issue.

I did not say I want anyone to die. Do you know that area?
The outskirts of LA to Lancaster and Victorville are straight up desert and where NASA did all their X planes testing. Like where we tested experimental aircraft because it was a freaking desert and there was desert, military bases, rattlesnakes Joshua trees and jack rabbits. Not Many people. If there was a fire there was no congestion to get out.

I am fine with a small amount of people living in areas where nature does not support it; but when you turn it into Fairfax county and then the palisades into McLean with mountains what do you expect?

That area has always had high winds in the winter since long before man was on earth. And, yes, little water - hence it is a desert.

Like I said - some places mother nature is going to flex and people should take notice of her warning.

You cannot city plan in a f’n canyon neighborhood with single point of failure surrounding you. These are big mountains and winds, egress and water are all limiting factors.

+100. All this would do is make other people pay more for their insurance. And to the posters that exaggerate about having no place to live without risk - that's not what we're talking about and you know it. Shame on you if you don't. There's risk and then there's tempting fate to squish you. I mean - people always choose to do stupid things then complain they had no other choice - then they need to pay for their choice. Sorry but if I'm in Chicago and a blizzard destroys my house the Feb that's something nobody could see coming - it's misfortune is what that is. But if you live like 1 block from an ocean on the coast where hurricanes come every season and your house gets destroyed during hurricane season.. that's not misfortune that's inevitable. And if you can't appreciate the difference between the risk of living in a place allowing nature to quash you and the risk of nature hurting you, you are a damn fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s awful, but it’s God’s way of sending a message.

OK?
What's the message

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s awful, but it’s God’s way of sending a message.

OK?
What's the message

I haven’t figured it out yet, but it doesn’t look good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s awful, but it’s God’s way of sending a message.

OK?
What's the message

He’s showing us who is capable of empathy and who is not
He is showing us who lies and who tells the truth
He will soon show us who with power and resources will help, and who with power and resources will hoard rather than help

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born and raised in LA and I could care less about these fires.
LA is grown so much in last 40 years there are people over consuming the water of 5 states and building in geographical areas that are nearly inaccessible for a response by heavy equipment.

Let it burn and limit rebuilding to 1 out 10 homes.
Maybe people will move from a freaking natural desert not sustainable for mass
Human populations.

At least 5 people are dead. Thousands are suffering trauma you can’t imagine. Try to act like you at least have cognitive empathy.

Check your water statements. Do you want California agriculture to stop? That’s where the majority of the water goes. It’s not a population issue.

I did not say I want anyone to die. Do you know that area?
The outskirts of LA to Lancaster and Victorville are straight up desert and where NASA did all their X planes testing. Like where we tested experimental aircraft because it was a freaking desert and there was desert, military bases, rattlesnakes Joshua trees and jack rabbits. Not Many people. If there was a fire there was no congestion to get out.

I am fine with a small amount of people living in areas where nature does not support it; but when you turn it into Fairfax county and then the palisades into McLean with mountains what do you expect?

That area has always had high winds in the winter since long before man was on earth. And, yes, little water - hence it is a desert.

Like I said - some places mother nature is going to flex and people should take notice of her warning.

You cannot city plan in a f’n canyon neighborhood with single point of failure surrounding you. These are big mountains and winds, egress and water are all limiting factors.

Okay. So where are relocating these millions of people?

“Where are relocating” - you need to complete a sentence with a pro-noun there.

If you used “we” you are a complete idiot. Not society’s job to relocate people from illogical places to live.

If you used “they” then you are still pretty much an idiot. They are the evolved superior species on the planet - they can figure it out for themselves for a more logical habitat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Makes you wonder if it is an act of terrorism. You don't need a dirty bomb or something huge to cause massive destruction. Something as small as purposefully throwing a cigarette onto dry brush can in CA can now cause mass destruction and massive financial pain for the whole country.

Especially if your government has completely abdicated on any fuel reduction activities.

California already has more hybrid and EV’s than any state in the country.

Psst: they are still denying climate change. All they care about are a few weeds in an area they've said is way overcrowded. They think there are no other factors than the brush they imagine is choking the whole landscape there. The winds are not an issue. The climate is not an issue.

Are you denying climate change if you rebuild in a high risk fire zone?

What should be done about the vast numbers of structures on the New Madrid fault, none of which are built to withstand even a mild earthquake? What should be done about Texas and its failed power grid. At least 365 people died directly from heat in Texas last year, so what about that? Your line of thinking leads to the conclusion that no one can live anywhere.

Your hysterics lead you to that conclusion. But it's pretty clear LA is becoming increasingly inhospitable in a way the majority of other places aren't.

DP but what hysterics? It is factual and well-documented that the Midwest is completely unprepared for a massive earthquake and in fact they have chosen not to strengthen building codes.

"no one can live anywhere!" Is pretty hysterical.

But true, if the position is that people should only rebuild in places where there is no climate risk, which seems to be what the PP was saying.

Should any house that isn’t built to California- and Japan-style earthquake standards be insurable in the Midwest? Yes or no?

People can rebuild anywhere they are allowed to by government regulation. But private insurers make the decision whether or not they will insure someone. I don't make the rules, and neither do you. That's just the way things are.

[Anonymous]

So how long do people think recovery/rebuilding is going to take? The real estate is too valuable to not rebuild. 5-7 years? 10 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how long do people think recovery/rebuilding is going to take? The real estate is too valuable to not rebuild. 5-7 years? 10 years?

It feels a little mercenary to speculate on this right now, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how long do people think recovery/rebuilding is going to take? The real estate is too valuable to not rebuild. 5-7 years? 10 years?

State Farm and farmers already stopped insuring in CA.

The remaining insurers will pay out these claims and then go bankrupt or stop insuring as well.
So it will depend on the homeowner- if they owned their home outright they will rebuild and self insure. If they had a note on their home they should pay off their note if they can and move.

Either way, after this real estate should be more affordable- insurance not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how long do people think recovery/rebuilding is going to take? The real estate is too valuable to not rebuild. 5-7 years? 10 years?

It feels a little mercenary to speculate on this right now, no?

Weird. No. I’m not swooping in with cash to buy underinsured properties.

I’m wondering how long recovery may take based on similarly devastated areas. Just the logistics of rerunning electricity, getting funding and then actually getting a contractor. I’m not familiar with how Paradise or Hawaii recovered or how long it takes. And these are larger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born and raised in LA and I could care less about these fires.
LA is grown so much in last 40 years there are people over consuming the water of 5 states and building in geographical areas that are nearly inaccessible for a response by heavy equipment.

Let it burn and limit rebuilding to 1 out 10 homes.
Maybe people will move from a freaking natural desert not sustainable for mass
Human populations.

At least 5 people are dead. Thousands are suffering trauma you can’t imagine. Try to act like you at least have cognitive empathy.

Check your water statements. Do you want California agriculture to stop? That’s where the majority of the water goes. It’s not a population issue.

I did not say I want anyone to die. Do you know that area?
The outskirts of LA to Lancaster and Victorville are straight up desert and where NASA did all their X planes testing. Like where we tested experimental aircraft because it was a freaking desert and there was desert, military bases, rattlesnakes Joshua trees and jack rabbits. Not Many people. If there was a fire there was no congestion to get out.

I am fine with a small amount of people living in areas where nature does not support it; but when you turn it into Fairfax county and then the palisades into McLean with mountains what do you expect?

That area has always had high winds in the winter since long before man was on earth. And, yes, little water - hence it is a desert.

Like I said - some places mother nature is going to flex and people should take notice of her warning.

You cannot city plan in a f’n canyon neighborhood with single point of failure surrounding you. These are big mountains and winds, egress and water are all limiting factors.

+100. All this would do is make other people pay more for their insurance. And to the posters that exaggerate about having no place to live without risk - that's not what we're talking about and you know it. Shame on you if you don't. There's risk and then there's tempting fate to squish you. I mean - people always choose to do stupid things then complain they had no other choice - then they need to pay for their choice. Sorry but if I'm in Chicago and a blizzard destroys my house the Feb that's something nobody could see coming - it's misfortune is what that is. But if you live like 1 block from an ocean on the coast where hurricanes come every season and your house gets destroyed during hurricane season.. that's not misfortune that's inevitable. And if you can't appreciate the difference between the risk of living in a place allowing nature to quash you and the risk of nature hurting you, you are a damn fool.

It’s inevitable that thousands and thousands of houses are going to be destroyed across the entire Midwest when New Madrid unleashes. So you are presumably saying all Midwesterners are fools?

Where do you want them all to move? Be specific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born and raised in LA and I could care less about these fires.
LA is grown so much in last 40 years there are people over consuming the water of 5 states and building in geographical areas that are nearly inaccessible for a response by heavy equipment.

Let it burn and limit rebuilding to 1 out 10 homes.
Maybe people will move from a freaking natural desert not sustainable for mass
Human populations.

At least 5 people are dead. Thousands are suffering trauma you can’t imagine. Try to act like you at least have cognitive empathy.

Check your water statements. Do you want California agriculture to stop? That’s where the majority of the water goes. It’s not a population issue.

I did not say I want anyone to die. Do you know that area?
The outskirts of LA to Lancaster and Victorville are straight up desert and where NASA did all their X planes testing. Like where we tested experimental aircraft because it was a freaking desert and there was desert, military bases, rattlesnakes Joshua trees and jack rabbits. Not Many people. If there was a fire there was no congestion to get out.

I am fine with a small amount of people living in areas where nature does not support it; but when you turn it into Fairfax county and then the palisades into McLean with mountains what do you expect?

That area has always had high winds in the winter since long before man was on earth. And, yes, little water - hence it is a desert.

Like I said - some places mother nature is going to flex and people should take notice of her warning.

You cannot city plan in a f’n canyon neighborhood with single point of failure surrounding you. These are big mountains and winds, egress and water are all limiting factors.

Okay. So where are relocating these millions of people?

“Where are relocating” - you need to complete a sentence with a pro-noun there.

If you used “we” you are a complete idiot. Not society’s job to relocate people from illogical places to live.

If you used “they” then you are still pretty much an idiot. They are the evolved superior species on the planet - they can figure it out for themselves for a more logical habitat.

Oh, so you want wealthy Californians to buy up all the land in the tiny chunks of the country where there is lesser climate risk? That seems totally workable. 🙄

Question: do you ever talk to human beings other than your mom when she brings you your lunch to your basement hole?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Makes you wonder if it is an act of terrorism. You don't need a dirty bomb or something huge to cause massive destruction. Something as small as purposefully throwing a cigarette onto dry brush can in CA can now cause mass destruction and massive financial pain for the whole country.

Especially if your government has completely abdicated on any fuel reduction activities.

California already has more hybrid and EV’s than any state in the country.

Psst: they are still denying climate change. All they care about are a few weeds in an area they've said is way overcrowded. They think there are no other factors than the brush they imagine is choking the whole landscape there. The winds are not an issue. The climate is not an issue.

Are you denying climate change if you rebuild in a high risk fire zone?

What should be done about the vast numbers of structures on the New Madrid fault, none of which are built to withstand even a mild earthquake? What should be done about Texas and its failed power grid. At least 365 people died directly from heat in Texas last year, so what about that? Your line of thinking leads to the conclusion that no one can live anywhere.

Your hysterics lead you to that conclusion. But it's pretty clear LA is becoming increasingly inhospitable in a way the majority of other places aren't.

DP but what hysterics? It is factual and well-documented that the Midwest is completely unprepared for a massive earthquake and in fact they have chosen not to strengthen building codes.

"no one can live anywhere!" Is pretty hysterical.

The DARVO is strong with you. You made the outrageous claim about Californians not rebuilding. I pointed out that there is no “safe” place.

I wasn’t that poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Makes you wonder if it is an act of terrorism. You don't need a dirty bomb or something huge to cause massive destruction. Something as small as purposefully throwing a cigarette onto dry brush can in CA can now cause mass destruction and massive financial pain for the whole country.

There a currently arsonists and looters