Reply to Palisades Fire

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Palisades Fire - Los Angeles"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The fire chief in a press conference stated the electricity shut off led to pumps stopping this no water for hydrants.

Risk is not some code phrase for "it will happen".  There are varying levels of risk.  If one chooses to build in the sand when the tides in water hits your house - well that's a higher risk than building on dry land for your house to wash away.  You all get that right?  So when we say people in the Palisades (less Pasadena/Altemeda) should not be there, we mean that the fire catastrophe risk of living there is high. So when we suggest parts where nature dominates humans historically may not be suitable for homes.  The statement - well where should people live if nowhere is safe - totally misses this point.  It's about practical and logical decision making.  If the risk is really high you don't want to be there.  Period.  
That is all.  You find another place.  You just do.

You can manage risk - so living in parts of CA isn't the same as living exactly where wildfires will likely engulf your house one day given enough opportunity for the right conditions.  Talk to any meteorologist or climate scientist and they all are saying this was completely foreseeable.  Whether you want to take note of this fact is your choice.  [b]The same is true in FL and honestly anywhere in the MW as well. [/b] I personally never moved to CA as much as I love the beauty there because they will have an earthquake and I don't feel like being there.  Now of course many dumbasses will say - hah you can be in an earthquake anywhere like DC had one -  but - we all know the size and scale of what a CA big earthquake will look like.  Other dumbasses will say - you gotta live your life and can't be scared of it.  And I say to that - if you know it's coming and you do it anyway, it's totally on you.  [b]There's a lot of other beautiful places to choose to live that are much less riskier.  [/b]

So risk is real but it's variable.  People who cannot grasp that some locations are riskier to live safely than others are just plain asking for tragedy. It's not that I am not heartbroken for all who lost everything in this tragedy but just saying - there's also a reason why it's like $4M to live there - it's drop dead gorgeous every day.  But you are in danger every day there.[/quote]

Name the places that are beautiful but a much less riskier. Be specific here.

You’ve already correctly eliminated the entire Midwest and Florida. I want to know where else in the US you want all residents of the Midwest, California, and Florida to move. [/quote]

Idaho has gotten much more popular. Plenty of space there.[/quote]
Because there are never any wildfires in Idaho... SMDH!![/quote]

But you can actually get fire insurance there. California, not so much.[/quote]

Wait, what? The insurance problems for wildfire risk areas is just as problematic in Idaho. Oregon is now a problem too. Climate change does not care whether you are a Maggot or a lib. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics