Palisades Fire - Los Angeles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA is a nightmare, just suburbia stretched out.
Many areas have only a few good highways to get into and out of. Despite this they are popular areas to live in. Evacuation orders cause huge traffic jams.
There is no metro.
This is in someway an opportunity for city planners to rethink and create a better more functional city.
Don’t ask me about the school system, their education is a nightmare too.
One would think that the richest state in the richest country could do better.
Currently they are tackling homelessness by pretending it doesn’t exist even though that has not helped at all

California is the wealthiest state, kind of. They have 500 BILLION of debt. That is the highest debt to income ratio of any state - 106%!
NY is the next most in debt state but no where close to California.

CA swings wildly based on IPOs. For years CA has had billions in surplus. Interest rates going up and the banking issue in SV put a damper on the IPOs. Between reserves , being able to adjust the budget and new start ups recovering it’s fine. CA often ends higher than projected.

CA public education is excellent in some areas and crappy in others, like everywhere else. The public school in some areas of LA , not LA unified and the Bay Area , not San Jose Unified are better than your top public schools in the DMV. The UC system is the best in the nation. Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are light years better than other state flagships. Heck, the top Cal State schools are better than most state flagships.

The schools that are good are good because of the types of students that go there, not what the administration is doing or what they're investing in students. You'll get large class sizes and not-great per pupil spending but a good student population especially since some parts of CA don't have as much of a private school culture.

The curriculum was far, far better than MCPS. The buildings and grounds were so much better too. The class sizes were not larger than MCPS. There was more parent and foundation funding for things which you couldn’t do in MCPS. The UC system attract top faculty that get top research grants. The state is large enough and the state options compelling enough that you don’t siphon off the best students to private universities out of state.

A lot of the schools are trailers and look like shanty towns. The facilities are terrible with little security in LA.

I’m not the PP but I don’t think you have any personal experience with LA schools.

That having been said in years of reading DCUM I have found that the gaping emotional need of some DCUM posters to believe California schools are universally bad is weirdly large. I don’t get it but whatever.

I attended CA public schools; did you?

Stop trying to gaslight people about California’s public school system.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

[Anonymous]

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?

LA and LA County are very far down the list for water rights in California and that's not something Newsome or the county can change

Then why keep building there?

Rainfall is cyclical in California and swings between years of over normal rainfall and then years of drought. Rainfall amounts are collected from July to June. February is the rainiest month in LA.

In Westwood (UCLA, close to Palisades) the average rainfall amount is 17 inches. Last year it rained 35 inches and the year before it rained 37 inches. This year only 1/10 of an inch has fallen. In Pasadena the normal rainfall is 20 inches, last year 30 inches fell and the year before 41 inches. This year .06 inches have fallen. So over the last two years brush has grown like crazy due to all the rains. Then this year it hasn't rained (hopefully it will in Feb and March), so a massive amount of overgrown brush is bone dry. Now add Santa Ana winds which are hot dry winds that blow in from the desert and you have wildfire conditions.

Another factor is that the state of CA mandates that cities continue to build housing even though there really isn't enough water. They have passed legislation overriding city and county laws that limit housing in fire prone communities. The state will fine cities if they don't continue to build housing. California’s Senate Bill 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, waives local development standards if 5% of the project includes affordable homes for those who are very low income. In other words, the city would be forced to approve a development, regardless of public safety or density concerns including how there will be enough water for the development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA is a nightmare, just suburbia stretched out.
Many areas have only a few good highways to get into and out of. Despite this they are popular areas to live in. Evacuation orders cause huge traffic jams.
There is no metro.
This is in someway an opportunity for city planners to rethink and create a better more functional city.
Don’t ask me about the school system, their education is a nightmare too.
One would think that the richest state in the richest country could do better.
Currently they are tackling homelessness by pretending it doesn’t exist even though that has not helped at all

California is the wealthiest state, kind of. They have 500 BILLION of debt. That is the highest debt to income ratio of any state - 106%!
NY is the next most in debt state but no where close to California.

CA swings wildly based on IPOs. For years CA has had billions in surplus. Interest rates going up and the banking issue in SV put a damper on the IPOs. Between reserves , being able to adjust the budget and new start ups recovering it’s fine. CA often ends higher than projected.

CA public education is excellent in some areas and crappy in others, like everywhere else. The public school in some areas of LA , not LA unified and the Bay Area , not San Jose Unified are better than your top public schools in the DMV. The UC system is the best in the nation. Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are light years better than other state flagships. Heck, the top Cal State schools are better than most state flagships.

The schools that are good are good because of the types of students that go there, not what the administration is doing or what they're investing in students. You'll get large class sizes and not-great per pupil spending but a good student population especially since some parts of CA don't have as much of a private school culture.

The curriculum was far, far better than MCPS. The buildings and grounds were so much better too. The class sizes were not larger than MCPS. There was more parent and foundation funding for things which you couldn’t do in MCPS. The UC system attract top faculty that get top research grants. The state is large enough and the state options compelling enough that you don’t siphon off the best students to private universities out of state.

A lot of the schools are trailers and look like shanty towns. The facilities are terrible with little security in LA.

I’m not the PP but I don’t think you have any personal experience with LA schools.

That having been said in years of reading DCUM I have found that the gaping emotional need of some DCUM posters to believe California schools are universally bad is weirdly large. I don’t get it but whatever.

I attended CA public schools; did you?

Stop trying to gaslight people about California’s public school system.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Yes, my entire life through university. And you are one of those who has a desperate emotional need to trash California schools. It’s a quirk of DCUM.

[Anonymous]

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/08/lynda-stewart-resnick-california-water/

The couple that uses more water than LA combined (and some years LA and the Bay Area combined)

[Anonymous]

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

+100. I'm a Midwest girl and even I know this was unstoppable. I love how people think they can control nature and wield so much power as a species. We just can't, in fact we suck at a lot of things v to the rest of living things. The few things we do well have allowed us to take over the earth but we are still mere mortals with limited powers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/08/lynda-stewart-resnick-california-water/

The couple that uses more water than LA combined (and some years LA and the Bay Area combined)

If by 'couple' you mean a massive produce farm. JFK that article is ridiculous

[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: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.

I am certainly not blaming firefighters or saying they do not prepare (never said so!). I am saying MORE resources, MORE engines, MORE firefighters would have helped, and yes, an increased budget would have been needed. I also don't hate taxes. You keep repeating something I never said (I am not a Republican btw, and voted for Harris).

The LAFD Fire Chief herself said it would have made a difference:

"My message is the fire department needs to be properly funded," Crowley said. "It’s not."Crowley, however, disagreed.

"Any budget cut is going to impact our ability to provide service," Crowley said.

Crowley said since 2010, the amount of calls firefighters have responded to has doubled, but there are fewer fire stations now than there were then – and 68 fewer firefighters.

"The fire department needs to be funded appropriately so that I can look any community member in the eye and say your LAFD’s got your back," Crowley said.

Funding would not have stopped this.

[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.

I am certainly not blaming firefighters or saying they do not prepare (never said so!). I am saying MORE resources, MORE engines, MORE firefighters would have helped, and yes, an increased budget would have been needed. I also don't hate taxes. You keep repeating something I never said (I am not a Republican btw, and voted for Harris).

The LAFD Fire Chief herself said it would have made a difference:

"My message is the fire department needs to be properly funded," Crowley said. "It’s not."Crowley, however, disagreed.

"Any budget cut is going to impact our ability to provide service," Crowley said.

Crowley said since 2010, the amount of calls firefighters have responded to has doubled, but there are fewer fire stations now than there were then – and 68 fewer firefighters.

"The fire department needs to be funded appropriately so that I can look any community member in the eye and say your LAFD’s got your back," Crowley said.

Funding would not have stopped this.

What is "this"? If you mean the fires, you are right. But it would have helped with the response and saved more homes. There were firefighters ready to go who didn't have a firetruck to get on because they didn't have enough mechanics to fix them. And the reservoir/hydrant issue is currently being questioned by Newsom:https://x.com/GavinNewsom/status/1877823208273178995

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA is a nightmare, just suburbia stretched out.
Many areas have only a few good highways to get into and out of. Despite this they are popular areas to live in. Evacuation orders cause huge traffic jams.
There is no metro.
This is in someway an opportunity for city planners to rethink and create a better more functional city.
Don’t ask me about the school system, their education is a nightmare too.
One would think that the richest state in the richest country could do better.
Currently they are tackling homelessness by pretending it doesn’t exist even though that has not helped at all

California is the wealthiest state, kind of. They have 500 BILLION of debt. That is the highest debt to income ratio of any state - 106%!
NY is the next most in debt state but no where close to California.

CA swings wildly based on IPOs. For years CA has had billions in surplus. Interest rates going up and the banking issue in SV put a damper on the IPOs. Between reserves , being able to adjust the budget and new start ups recovering it’s fine. CA often ends higher than projected.

CA public education is excellent in some areas and crappy in others, like everywhere else. The public school in some areas of LA , not LA unified and the Bay Area , not San Jose Unified are better than your top public schools in the DMV. The UC system is the best in the nation. Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are light years better than other state flagships. Heck, the top Cal State schools are better than most state flagships.

The schools that are good are good because of the types of students that go there, not what the administration is doing or what they're investing in students. You'll get large class sizes and not-great per pupil spending but a good student population especially since some parts of CA don't have as much of a private school culture.

The curriculum was far, far better than MCPS. The buildings and grounds were so much better too. The class sizes were not larger than MCPS. There was more parent and foundation funding for things which you couldn’t do in MCPS. The UC system attract top faculty that get top research grants. The state is large enough and the state options compelling enough that you don’t siphon off the best students to private universities out of state.

A lot of the schools are trailers and look like shanty towns. The facilities are terrible with little security in LA.

I’m not the PP but I don’t think you have any personal experience with LA schools.

That having been said in years of reading DCUM I have found that the gaping emotional need of some DCUM posters to believe California schools are universally bad is weirdly large. I don’t get it but whatever.

I attended CA public schools; did you?

Stop trying to gaslight people about California’s public school system.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

That PP probably attended California schools in the 60s and is trying to tell everyone how it is today. What a joke. I think PP has zero personal experience with LA schools lately. Otherwise tell us the specific name of the fabulous school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA is a nightmare, just suburbia stretched out.
Many areas have only a few good highways to get into and out of. Despite this they are popular areas to live in. Evacuation orders cause huge traffic jams.
There is no metro.
This is in someway an opportunity for city planners to rethink and create a better more functional city.
Don’t ask me about the school system, their education is a nightmare too.
One would think that the richest state in the richest country could do better.
Currently they are tackling homelessness by pretending it doesn’t exist even though that has not helped at all

California is the wealthiest state, kind of. They have 500 BILLION of debt. That is the highest debt to income ratio of any state - 106%!
NY is the next most in debt state but no where close to California.

CA swings wildly based on IPOs. For years CA has had billions in surplus. Interest rates going up and the banking issue in SV put a damper on the IPOs. Between reserves , being able to adjust the budget and new start ups recovering it’s fine. CA often ends higher than projected.

CA public education is excellent in some areas and crappy in others, like everywhere else. The public school in some areas of LA , not LA unified and the Bay Area , not San Jose Unified are better than your top public schools in the DMV. The UC system is the best in the nation. Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are light years better than other state flagships. Heck, the top Cal State schools are better than most state flagships.

The schools that are good are good because of the types of students that go there, not what the administration is doing or what they're investing in students. You'll get large class sizes and not-great per pupil spending but a good student population especially since some parts of CA don't have as much of a private school culture.

The curriculum was far, far better than MCPS. The buildings and grounds were so much better too. The class sizes were not larger than MCPS. There was more parent and foundation funding for things which you couldn’t do in MCPS. The UC system attract top faculty that get top research grants. The state is large enough and the state options compelling enough that you don’t siphon off the best students to private universities out of state.

A lot of the schools are trailers and look like shanty towns. The facilities are terrible with little security in LA.

I’m not the PP but I don’t think you have any personal experience with LA schools.

That having been said in years of reading DCUM I have found that the gaping emotional need of some DCUM posters to believe California schools are universally bad is weirdly large. I don’t get it but whatever.

I attended CA public schools; did you?

Stop trying to gaslight people about California’s public school system.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Yes, my entire life through university. And you are one of those who has a desperate emotional need to trash California schools. It’s a quirk of DCUM.

So what is your most recent experience with public schools and why do you think you know better with your dated experience?

[Anonymous]

It seems like agriculture may need to be scaled back in California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have much empathy for people who don't insure even though they are high income. A high income person can afford the mortgage in Malibu AND the FAIR coverage, AND fill in what isn't covered with their savings and ongoing income. If they decided to risk it and not pay for coverage, they have to pay up when their bet doesn't pay off.

And I really don't feel bad for the grandfathered in grandparents either. They are holding on to VERY expensive properties and basically betting that they won't have a fire. They shouldn't enjoy both windfall profits from the past 30 years and not have to pay the price when things go wrong.

"PP here from the area. Yep, FAIR doesn't apply to most people even in Malibu since they still CAN get insurance, it's just really expensive and bad coverage (FAIR is expensive and bare bones too).

But yeah, the thing about the area is, it's very expensive and people are generally UMC but not necessarily risk-averse and not the sort of financial situation where the cost of fire + earthquake + flood or an umbrella policy would not be a SERIOUS expense they might not be able to afford comfortably without trimming elsewhere, unless they are grandfathered in (like my parents). Even for my parents, it is a significant cost and one they have to budget for carefully from retirement/pension."

You can’t buy insurance if it’s not offered anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like agriculture may need to be scaled back in California.

The MAGAs would lose their minds. The red areas are in the agricultural areas.

CA is the largest producer of the US food supply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA is a nightmare, just suburbia stretched out.
Many areas have only a few good highways to get into and out of. Despite this they are popular areas to live in. Evacuation orders cause huge traffic jams.
There is no metro.
This is in someway an opportunity for city planners to rethink and create a better more functional city.
Don’t ask me about the school system, their education is a nightmare too.
One would think that the richest state in the richest country could do better.
Currently they are tackling homelessness by pretending it doesn’t exist even though that has not helped at all

California is the wealthiest state, kind of. They have 500 BILLION of debt. That is the highest debt to income ratio of any state - 106%!
NY is the next most in debt state but no where close to California.

CA swings wildly based on IPOs. For years CA has had billions in surplus. Interest rates going up and the banking issue in SV put a damper on the IPOs. Between reserves , being able to adjust the budget and new start ups recovering it’s fine. CA often ends higher than projected.

CA public education is excellent in some areas and crappy in others, like everywhere else. The public school in some areas of LA , not LA unified and the Bay Area , not San Jose Unified are better than your top public schools in the DMV. The UC system is the best in the nation. Berkeley, UCLA, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis are light years better than other state flagships. Heck, the top Cal State schools are better than most state flagships.

The schools that are good are good because of the types of students that go there, not what the administration is doing or what they're investing in students. You'll get large class sizes and not-great per pupil spending but a good student population especially since some parts of CA don't have as much of a private school culture.

The curriculum was far, far better than MCPS. The buildings and grounds were so much better too. The class sizes were not larger than MCPS. There was more parent and foundation funding for things which you couldn’t do in MCPS. The UC system attract top faculty that get top research grants. The state is large enough and the state options compelling enough that you don’t siphon off the best students to private universities out of state.

A lot of the schools are trailers and look like shanty towns. The facilities are terrible with little security in LA.

I’m not the PP but I don’t think you have any personal experience with LA schools.

That having been said in years of reading DCUM I have found that the gaping emotional need of some DCUM posters to believe California schools are universally bad is weirdly large. I don’t get it but whatever.

I attended CA public schools; did you?

Stop trying to gaslight people about California’s public school system.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Yes, my entire life through university. And you are one of those who has a desperate emotional need to trash California schools. It’s a quirk of DCUM.

So what is your most recent experience with public schools and why do you think you know better with your dated experience?

DP but my youngest is still in high school, oldest is at a UC. It has been far better here than MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Some useful interviews with experts in fire management. The finger-pointing on this thread is truly pathetic. We need a major overhaul in how we think about natural disaster response, and changes won't happen overnight.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2025/01/los-angeles-palisades-eaton/681269/

California, and Southern California in particular, has some of the most well-equipped firefighting forces in the world, which have had to think more about fire than perhaps any other in the United States. On his YouTube livestream discussing the fires, the climate scientist Daniel Swain compared the combined fleet of vehicles, aircraft, and personnel to the army of a small nation. If these firefighters couldn’t quickly get this fire contained, likely no one could. This week’s series of fires is testing the upper limits of the profession’s capacity to fight wind-driven fires under dry conditions, Swain said, and rather than call these firefighters incompetent, it’s better to wonder how “all of this has unfolded despite that.”

The reality is that in conditions like these, once a few houses caught fire in the Pacific Palisades, even the best firefighting could likely do little to keep the blaze from spreading, Michael Wara, a former member of California’s wildfire commission who now directs a climate-and-energy-policy program at Stanford, told me. “Firefighting is not going to be effective in the context we saw a few days ago,” when winds were highest, he said. “You could put a fire truck in every driveway and it would not matter.” He recounted that he was once offered a job at UCLA, but when the university took him to look at potential places to live in the Pacific Palisades, he immediately saw hazards. “It had terrible evacuation routes, but also the street layout was aligned with the Santa Ana winds so that the houses would burn down like dominoes,” he said. “The houses themselves were built very, very close together, so that the radiant heat from one house would ignite the house next door.”