26
Oct
07

Wildfires

I have several thoughts about the wildfires.

1. I heard a story on NPR that hasn’t been repeated anywhere else.  Apparently a town was issued a mandatory evacuation order and some people refused to obey it.  The fires shifted toward the town quickly, and while firefighters were rescuing those who stayed behind.  While that was happening, a lot of homes burned down.  I think those who refused to obey the evacuation order should be held accountable.  They should have to repay the people who had their homes destroyed.

2. People who continually build and rebuild their homes in areas effected year after year by the Santa Ana winds and wildfires should not be allowed to get money from taxpayers or insurance companies to do so.  It’s just stupid.  It’s like building houses in areas that constantly get flooded.  Freak weather patterns are one thing, but if your home (or any of those around it) is destroyed once every ten years or more, you’re an idiot.  Build a house somewhere else.

3.  People who start fires that destroy thousands of acres of land and kill people should be charged with crimes against humanity and murder as well as arson.  It is the worst kind of destruction and deserves no forgiveness.

3,840 US soldiers killed in Iraq.  28,327 US soldiers wounded in this immoral war.

Advertisements

11 Responses to “Wildfires”


  1. October 26, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    1. That would be a solution, but so would letting them burn up…not that I’m recommending that mind you.

    2. The problem with not building in disaster-prone areas is that there are so damn few of them. To avoid Santa Ana winds, you’d have to relocate all of Southern California from north of LA to the Mexican border someplace further east than the Sierra mountains. It’s true you can move some things out of flood plains, but places like New Orleans would have to be razed and everyone moved to higher ground hundreds of miles away from the delta and the banks of the Mississippi and our other major rivers because they ALL flood. The midwest would be empty because they have tornadoes and most of the east and gulf coast would have to be move because of hurricanes. Blizzards can cause real damage and when they melt in a hurry they flood areas that don’t normally flood. I figure there a small patch somewhere in South Dakota that might be safe, but I don’t think we’d all fit there.

    3. I agree and they are held responsible for murder in some cases of victims die in the fire.

  2. October 27, 2007 at 8:10 am

    …and people who climb mountains should not be rescued when they have an accident
    …and drug addicts shouldn’t get medical help if they relapse
    …people who live in crime infested neighborhoods shouldn’t expect police protection
    …people who have boating accidents shouldn’t expect the Coast Guard to come to their rescue
    …people who live below sea level shouldn’t expect government help when the levi fails
    …people who live where there are blizzards shouldn’t expect the government to dig them out
    …Hurricane, mudslides, etc…

    Be careful for what you ask. We all take risks that when view from the outside look dangerous and illogical. Should I be denied insurance coverage in the case of an injury because I ride motorcycles, or a certain type of motorcycle? Should a poor kid’s baby be denied medicaid because the mother took a dangerous risk?

    If so, then who decides what risks are acceptible? Would you want this profit driven governem,t to decide who gets help or who can buy insurance?

  3. 3 unitedwelay1
    October 27, 2007 at 8:44 am

    Being rescued is different than having your recovery paid for using taxpayer money. And yes, if you climb a mountain and need rescued, you should have to pay for the rescue as well as the time and equiptment used in it. Society has determined what is an acceptable risk. It’s a societal norm, that doesn’t have to be followed, but all fo us should not have to pay for those who break it. IIf you jump out of a plane and your chute doesn’t open – your bad. Of course you deserve to be rescued if you survive, but I shouldn’t have to pay for your stup[idity. If your home has been burnt dopwn more than once in the last 20 years because of where you choose to live, I shouldn’t have to pay for your rescue or to help put out the fire and rebuild your home.

    Crime is a different issue. Crime is something that is out of your personal control. A fire caused by a lighting strike is out of your control. The community should help you out on that one. Drug addicts should get medical help, but they should have to pay for it themselves. Taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for rehab, nor should we be paying for the incarceration of drug addicts. People who live below sea level shouldn’t be able to have their homes rebuild with government or tax money. People who live below sea level and REFUSE to evacuate should have to pay for their own rescue. Those who CANNOT evacuate due to poor city planning should not hav to pay for their rescue, but should not be allowed to rebuild their homes in the same place that was flooded. Also, this is a stickier issue because the levi was poorly built in the first place. People who live where there are blizzards shouldn’t expect the government to pay for them to be dug out. The government should take care of the roads, government buildinggs, etc… Digging you out of your home because you choose to live in an area that gets 20 feet of snow in a blizzard every year is your own choice and your own responsibility. An accident is one thing. If you get caught up in an avalanche, a tornado (assuming your neighborhood hasn’t been destroyed more than once in 10 years), a hurricane (again, see my 10 year rule), a mudslide, or someother freak weather pattern, that’s one thing, but taxpayers should not have to continually pay for your stupidity if you live in an area that is being constantly destroyed. The earth is talking to you. LISTEN.

  4. October 27, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    Wow, those are a lot of conditions. Who executes those conditions? Would you agreed if the Bush admin told everyone in SoCal that no ones gets help because fires burn there all the time? Would you allow the Bush Admin to put a means test on who gets help in New Orleans? Scratch that, they already have… but in the inverse.

    Funny you mention lightning. My house has been hit twice in the last year. I’m glad you don’t work for my insurance company.

    Be careful what you ask for it could easily be applied to situations, like crime, that you can’t imagine.

  5. 5 unitedwelay1
    October 27, 2007 at 7:35 pm

    They get help, they just don’t get to rebuild there.

  6. 6 Rue
    October 27, 2007 at 8:15 pm

    I think alot of people would agree with you on alot of these points..in time. Right now, the fires are still burning. That and I just heard word that some illegal immigrants trying to get into the country were found burnt to death. A tragedy on so many levels. I heard some migrant workers didn’t leave because if they left the land they were working on..they would lose the job that feeds thier families in Mexico.I mention these only to make the point that there are thousands of stories. Each as individual as..well..we are. It’s hard to pass judgement when you don’t know the whys to these people being/living where they do. I don’t know any of these people. I don’t know whether they had the means to leave..or felt safe to go to shelter..or what. Right now, All I feel is sorrow. when/if I hear true stories of stupidity..maybe then I will feel less charitable

  7. October 28, 2007 at 1:17 pm

    I gotta agree with CrankyYankee on this one, in part. While I think it’s stupid for people to build houses in these areas that are prone to disaster, we do live in a free society. As for taxpayers not paying for things like rescuing & rebuilding, I disagree. Who decides what is acceptable? Should I be exempt from paying taxes for schools since I don’t have kids? Should my taxes support public social services that I, myself, don’t need? Should my taxes pay for a public hospital system that helps poor people who have bad nutrition and no access to preventative medicine? How about we sterilize poor women so they stop having kids that welfare has to pay for? Should we just let drug addicts die from an overdose or turn to crime because they can’t afford rehab?

    How far should we take this? We live in a society that requires everyone to pitch in and help out. We may disagree with a lot of choices our fellow citizens make, but once we start in with rhetoric of social control, you’re peering off a very scary ledge.

  8. October 29, 2007 at 1:18 pm

    Hi PC,

    I love the new look and formate of your blog here.

    You and I have been disgusted with our administration from day one. It is enlightening to now read how others have begun to see the light.

    have a good day.

  9. October 30, 2007 at 6:44 pm

    Fox News says that terrorist started the fires!

  10. 10 unitedwelay1
    October 31, 2007 at 8:00 am

    Dept,
    I read that and thought it was HORRIBLE!

  11. November 1, 2007 at 2:02 pm

    Wow. I agree almost entirely with UWL.
    Laura is correct in that we live in a free society and people can live pretty much where they want to. But they should not expect the rest of us to continually bail them out when the fire/mudslide/earthquake/whatever comes back.
    Lightning is a different issue. It is pretty random unless you have done some strange stuff to your house.

    AS for insurance companies, that is different, they are paid to help you rebuild. By you when you buy the policy. (just read it carefully) The taxpayers of the country shouldn’t be the ones rebuilding your house.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Top Posts

Disclaimer

I am not perfect. I do my best to practice what I preach, but I am human. My mantra is, "DO NO HARM". I may not always succeed, but I will always try. My goal is to be a better person today than I was yesterday.

Fair Use Notice

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Incidentally, this notice itself was swiped from Spiiderweb and Dave Away From Home

%d bloggers like this: