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.

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.

They may be wealthy. But the joke is on them. The same environmental regulations and advocacy groups that prevented the necessary forest/brush management activities in California are the same laws/groups that are going to prevent the rich from rebuilding or make it so costly/time consuming that they will just give up.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reservoirs were filled.
https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/extreme-weather-verify/palisades-los-angeles-fire-hydrants-water-fact-check/536-87045971-aacb-4319-9b39-8d999675eae1

No, they were not. Again, nice try.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/pacific-palisades-reservoir-was-offline-and-empty-when-firestorm-exploded/ar-BB1reKjC?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Did you read the article? The reservoir is closed for repairs - they do the repairs in the winter when demand is lower for water. Even if it was fully functional, the water level is kept low in the reservoirs due to low seasonal demand and not wanting to waste the water. And, finally, the experts in the article state that in their professional opinion it would not have mattered if the reservoir was full because nothing could negate 100mph Santa Ana winds and no aerial support.

This disaster is no individual's fault. It's not the government's fault. It's a collective action problem of building dense housing in a chaparral landscape.

If you're absolving everyone, you should definitely include absolving homeowners in well established areas there for decades. And if your issue is building permits being granted, then back to yes, it's actually the government's fault.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reservoirs were filled.
https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/extreme-weather-verify/palisades-los-angeles-fire-hydrants-water-fact-check/536-87045971-aacb-4319-9b39-8d999675eae1

No, they were not. Again, nice try.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/pacific-palisades-reservoir-was-offline-and-empty-when-firestorm-exploded/ar-BB1reKjC?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Did you read the article? The reservoir is closed for repairs - they do the repairs in the winter when demand is lower for water. Even if it was fully functional, the water level is kept low in the reservoirs due to low seasonal demand and not wanting to waste the water. And, finally, the experts in the article state that in their professional opinion it would not have mattered if the reservoir was full because nothing could negate 100mph Santa Ana winds and no aerial support.

This disaster is no individual's fault. It's not the government's fault. It's a collective action problem of building dense housing in a chaparral landscape.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reservoirs were filled.
https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/extreme-weather-verify/palisades-los-angeles-fire-hydrants-water-fact-check/536-87045971-aacb-4319-9b39-8d999675eae1

No, they were not. Again, nice try.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/pacific-palisades-reservoir-was-offline-and-empty-when-firestorm-exploded/ar-BB1reKjC?ocid=BingNewsSerp

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is California setting up temporary housing for people with no where to go? Or is even that impossible due to fires being not contained enough?

Also why are we not talking about climate change? The severity of this fire is clearly related to increasingly extreme weather - droughts and floods

My consolations to all who who have lost property or family members . It is a horrific situation. No easy answers.

Any Cal residents know?

When the fires hit Santa Cruz temporary shelters including ones that took pets were opened. Airbnb and beach house owners opened up their units to people being evacuated some charged, most deeply discounted, some did free but the population was way smaller. In Paradise, shelters were opened near Chico I think.

OK that is some thing as not everyone will have options elsewhere