Why the lack of preparation?

Woodznutz

Platinum Member
Dec 9, 2021
24,315
11,913
473
It seems that whatever the disaster is, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado, whatever, we are unprepared. Curious.
 
It seems that whatever the disaster is, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado, whatever, we are unprepared. Curious.
We do not invest in infrastructure, as it is expensive, and disrupts, while going on. It is better for politicians to be able to point to expansion, rather than spending money upgrading large pipes below ground to possibly save from a disaster that might not strike.
 
It seems that whatever the disaster is, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado, whatever, we are unprepared. Curious.
Incompetence.

Some reason disasters like Chernobyl happened in the USSR. When people put party over competence, society will start to fracture and fall apart.
 
We do not invest in infrastructure, as it is expensive, and disrupts, while going on. It is better for politicians to be able to point to expansion, rather than spending money upgrading large pipes below ground to possibly save from a disaster that might not strike.
We can't let the homeowners off the hook. Many houses had asphalt (petroleum-based) shingled roofs, and other combustible materials laying around.

The State (here in Wisconsin) builds log buildings in our state forests for various uses. They have metal roofs, three-foot-wide gravel beds around the foundation, and the exterior log walls are treated with flame retardant. This because they are in a forest, and forests sometimes burn.

A friend of mine built a large home in a hardwood forest. He also has a gravel bed around the foundation and a metal roof. He has no rain gutters on the house because he "wants the rainwater off the roof to keep the ground around the house as wet as possible". The structures the State builds also don't have rain gutters for the same reason.
 
Last edited:
We can't let the homeowners off the hook. Many houses had asphalt (petroleum-based) shingled roofs, and other combustible materials laying around.

The State (here in Wisconsin) builds log buildings in our state forests for various uses. They have metal roofs, three-foot-wide gravel beds around the foundation, and the exterior log walls are treated with flame retardant. This because they are in a forest, and forests sometimes burn.
It is government, developers, Realtors and the big money concerns in any and all communities. There is just a lack of political will to put money in the ground, while ripping up crowded streets and pristine lawns in and for upscale real estate.

Your state plans for longevity in their state park construction, a good thing. Congrats.
 
The right are the same people who excused trumps unpreparedness for COVID-19 even as systems were created for him to deal with the pandemic that he destroyed. So, nobody wants to hear this right-wing garbage about California.
 
We can't let the homeowners off the hook. Many houses had asphalt (petroleum-based) shingled roofs, and other combustible materials laying around.
What would you like to do? Fine them for buying houses they had nothing to do with building? That's what building codes are for.
It's only in the last two decades or so that communities are starting to implement stricter building codes to limit the damage that a tornado, hurricane or earthquake can do.
The State (here in Wisconsin) builds log buildings in our state forests for various uses. They have metal roofs, three-foot-wide gravel beds around the foundation, and the exterior log walls are treated with flame retardant. This because they are in a forest, and forests sometimes burn.
Metal roofs are expensive. I agree, they fare much better in climate zones that get a lot of snow and water. But they aren't very pretty.
But a fire of the magnitude in LA????............not sure even fireproof coating on a log structure would last that long. Just sayin.
A friend of mine built a large home in a hardwood forest. He also has a gravel bed around the foundation and a metal roof. He has no rain gutters on the house because he "wants the rainwater off the roof to keep the ground around the house as wet as possible". The structures the State builds also don't have rain gutters for the same reason.
But for most occupied dwellings, you don't want excess water accumulating around the foundation of the house. Water in the basement, flooding, etc.
 
We do not invest in infrastructure, as it is expensive, and disrupts, while going on. It is better for politicians to be able to point to expansion, rather than spending money upgrading large pipes below ground to possibly save from a disaster that might not strike.
Sleepy Joe Biden ran on infrastructure improvement and enacted a lot of that part of his plan.

Republicans poo pooe'd it and attacked it all the way, but are the first ones screaming, bitching and moaning about "bad infrastructure" when the crap hits the fan, yet they never do a cotton-pickin' thing about it when they're able to.
 
What would you like to do? Fine them for buying houses they had nothing to do with building? That's what building codes are for.
It's only in the last two decades or so that communities are starting to implement stricter building codes to limit the damage that a tornado, hurricane or earthquake can do.

.
It would be interesting to know,

1. How many roofs were replaced in the recent past with the same roofing material, and the cost comparison between asphalt and metal.

2. How a metal roof would affect the cost or availability of fire insurance.

 
Last edited:
Burn out all the evil rich people and let it become grazing land for the noble illegsls goats and sheep.
In today’s bitterly vengeful insane Democrat party; it’s not out of the question
 
Sleepy Joe Biden ran on infrastructure improvement and enacted a lot of that part of his plan.

Republicans poo pooe'd it and attacked it all the way, but are the first ones screaming, bitching and moaning about "bad infrastructure" when the crap hits the fan, yet they never do a cotton-pickin' thing about it when they're able to.
Looks like California did not want infrastructure dollars for improvement to water mains and fire line supply. Are you suggesting, he should have ruled over what the state wanted, forcing project on them? Is that what the next president should do for California? If so, should a President be allowed to force state projects within states, where the people living there or not? Personally, I don't think Joe could have gotten away with it, nor would trump.
 
Looks like California did not want infrastructure dollars for improvement to water mains and fire line supply. Are you suggesting, he should have ruled over what the state wanted, forcing project on them? Is that what the next president should do for California? If so, should a President be allowed to force state projects within states, where the people living there or not? Personally, I don't think Joe could have gotten away with it, nor would trump.
No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm just pointing out the dishonesty of Republicans suggesting that they're interested in infrastructure when they really aren't. In fact, they're historically against it.
 
It seems that whatever the disaster is, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado, whatever, we are unprepared. Curious.
There is a limit to how much it is practical to prepare for something that will never happen. If we all lived like stone age cavemen and put all our earnings in savings/safe investments we would all likely die millionaires. But who wants to sacrifice all quality of our current life for some distant time? So we spend enough to make us happy and satisfied as we have it even when we are responsible and save something for emergencies and for our future.

We don't build fireproof structures or hurricane proof homes because the cost is more than it is worth to us. But we can lessen the risk with fireproof roofs and strengthened walls and such.

We don't build essentially safe automobiles in which we would survive almost all auto crashes because the cost is more than we choose to accept. But we do pay extra for those seatbelts and airbags and firewalls and roll bars and antilock brakes that make autos a lot safer for us.

We accept some unknowns and are willing to gamble to a certain degree and are willing to give up so much current quality of life. So cities/states can prepare for ordinary fires, even wildfires that we know will occur at times. But fires of the magnitude California is currently dealing with, nobody could be completely prepared for.

We can prepare for bad storms, tornadoes, hurricanes but nobody can anticipate much less prepare for the magnitude of damage of say a Katrina or the North Carolina floods caused by Helene. We can fault no mayor or governor for not being prepared for something like that.

But we sure can fault public officials who don't do what is normal and reasonable to minimize damage when they know how to do that or are told how to do that. We can certainly fault public officials who are negligent in doing what they can to reasonably protect the public.
 

Forum List

Back
Top