Right. So it's not as if the problem here was building in fire zones. It's fire zones moving to buildings. Which is to say, if we abandon the area because they are now uninhabitable/uninsurable, that's an economic loss. It's better than cycles of building and rebuilding, but it's expensive either way.
2. Not sure. That would be a question for one of our Cali friends. But the reports indicate that it was, and local PTB allowed even more construction adding more properties to be dependent on limited resources in terms of what the "fire brigade" can access.
Oh come on. Everyone knows that if high winds are predicted, the correct course of action is to add a couple of lanes to the major evac routes. You know, you've got a few days lead time. More than enough time.
I was adding to your point, not offering a rival consideration. I'm not always good about making that clear.
CA deals with forest fires in the wild every year. Most of them start in fairly remote areas. What doesn't happen is several major fires in the LA area at once, compounded by 100 mph wind gusts. And in any event, understanding that fires like this are a possibility doesn't mean that it's easy or obvious how to stop or contain them under the current circumstances. Your post tellingly fails to identify what, exactly, could so easily have been done based on the experience with other fires, to prevent these fires from spreading at all. That's like suggesting that because Florida deals with hurricanes every year Florida shouldn't have any people killed or structures damaged by tornadoes. Unless you can point to experts saying there were obvious steps that can be taken to eliminate the possibility and spread of fires like this, then you're just mouthing empty criticisms like Trump is.
lol, do you think "traffic management" is what caused these fires to spread?
Here's what really caused L.A. fire hydrants to run out of water
As unprecedented wildfires raged through Los Angeles, some firefighters suddenly lost access to water. City officials called one shortage a “worst-case scenario”—one they expect to see again in the future.www.nationalgeographic.com
“It was like a worst-case scenario, but I think we should be planning for those worst case scenarios,” she said. “You can't predict everything, but also, I do think this is where we're headed.”
Competent leadership has a plan for how to manage evacuations. I don't know what basic traffic management would be in PP but there should have been a plan for how traffic was going to be dealt with. You can't just say "Leave now" without knowing people will be leaving by car and the traffic problems that will create. This is CA. Where Malibu burns almost every other year it seems like. This is like a hurricane in the south. One would expect LA to have a comprehensive plan for dealing with wildfires just as you would expect FL to have a plan for dealing with a hurricane. Running out of water is mind blowing. Apparently Gavin thinks so to because he has used this event to call for an independent review. Wonder why so quick to announce it? Nothing political there to see.
He still doesn't understand the role that gravity plays in moving water.
So angry. So dumb, so naive. A trifecta of ignorance.
Great response. Spoken like a true liberal. Excuses for everything. Maybe you should run for mayor
Yes, absolutely. The conflation of "mistakes" with "incompetence" goes back to W, when conservatives just couldn't deal with the fact that Bush was the buffoon that liberals said he was. So instead of acknowledging they screwed up, they just decided to pretend as if everyone is incompetent, as if invading Iraq and the Benghazi incident were remotely comparable.
It’s when the obvious is overlooked or pushed aside that it becomes glaring as in this case.
Pretty weak, even for you.
You're right. My first impulse was "unmitigated asshole with raging tiny dick energy."
Typical conservative - instead of citing facts in rebuttal, you just turn to personal insults.
Well you've set yourself up to hit a home run. What is so obvious about this fire that a nonfirefighter, non-politician, non-resident (I'm assuming you're from the East coast) could have figured this all out within 48 hours of the event. Things must have been really wrong, wrong enough to clarify, easily and precisely what could have been done correctly...given natural, monitary, and human/political constraints.
Once again, not even close to a substantive response. Are you going to link something explaining why the current circumstances could have been easily anticipated and dealt with by preventative measures? Or as usual is your source "trust me bro, I'm an expert on everything"?
Whatever, but just like a true dem of accusing pubs of doing exactly what they are doing, you were the first to insult. I just responded to your level of discourse.
I haven't insisted at all that I have all the answers. You are full of shit on that. I have listed the most basic common sense things that are again, common sense. Not my fault you can't see that.