Many of those in california are living in forrests and suburban areas that have been prime habitat for forrest fires. Why should we protect them when they weaken our control of fires by forcing fire fighters to defend places they sould not.
2007-10-24 15:02:39 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
this is different from hurricanes because they are hurting the effort overall. Those areas on the coast were already there people have been moving farther and farther into the forrests thats their fault
2007-10-24 15:12:15 · update #1
it looks like the overwhelming majority of citizens support the idea I hope u are ready for the huge tax increases of the future years.
2007-10-24 17:09:13 · update #2
You miss the issue of people living in the Hriicane areas...People elect to live ther, they are unwilling to tighten their building codes to ensure people live in safe houses then they want me to bail them out of hurricane problems...THe entire state of FL is an example. Same with floods. People keep building in flood plains and expect me to pay to fix their place each time it floods!!
2007-10-25 13:04:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All parts of the US (and probably the whole world) suffer from natural disasters.
We are fortunate that our economy can handle it - drop in the bucket, and actually adds to the GNP :)
Let's see hurricanes affect from Corpus Christie to Long Island Sound, and say 100 miles inland in every direction from there.
From N Carolina to Maine to the Rockies, blizzards can and do happen.
In the Plains states, not only blizzards, but tornadoes, and along the major rivers floods.
In the desert parts of Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, there is not much besides the heat to worry about, but most of it is public lands.
The West Coast is subject to earthquakes, fires and floods, and even volcanic activity all the way to Washington.
Hawaii? Storms and volcanoes.
Alaska? Mostly uninhabitable to begin with.
OK what is left?
Luckily we have that "United" part in our name and a "Federal" style government to provide and assure mutual aid. we all need it sometimes, and we all give it too :)
2007-10-24 15:15:12 · answer #2 · answered by Barry C 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I feel the same way about the homes that are built on the ocean in Florida, Tx, and La. These people live in Hurricane paths and keep rebuilding.
Bad planning was the problem in La. and bad government in La, is why people suffered.
I think they should eminent domain all those hazardous areas and make them a park so that WHEN the next hurricane comes, no people will live there.
The tax dollars wasted on constant rebuilding is senseless.
2007-10-24 15:09:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I would help if I could do anything reasonable, aside from that, I think local agencies and FEMA should take care of it. I'm guessing there is a large percentage of homeowners in the area with fire protection insurance, so, insurance companies can pay out a lot too.
2007-10-24 15:06:25 · answer #4 · answered by eldude 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No we shouldn't! to hell with them! Of course that goes for people that live near Oceans " hurricanes " The plains "tornadoes, " Mountains " mud slides and avalanches " River valleys " flooding " All these places are doomed. So i guess we should only help people in the desert?
2007-10-24 15:11:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe we shouldn't help anyone who lives on the coast where a hurricane may happen (this means we shouldn't help anyone in FL, LA, TX, SC, etc) Also, we shouldn't help anyone that lives in Kansas because they know there are lots of tornadoes there. No help for those in Hawaii because they choose to live near volcanoes. And of course, we shouldn't help anyone in CA because they chose to live near forests.....are you serious?
2007-10-24 15:07:59 · answer #6 · answered by ~*Bella*~ 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because it is a free country. If they choose to live in those ares, they open themselves up to those risks. They provide taxes like everyone else to support the services.
2007-10-24 15:06:03 · answer #7 · answered by booman17 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
CONTRARY TO ALL DISCUSSIONS, THE COASTAL AREAS IN FLORIDA AND MISSISSIPPI HAVE BEEN NOW BANNED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WHO HAVE TAKEN TREMENDOUS LOSSES.
WE AS A SOCIETY PAY FOR THOSE PLACES THAT ARE ALWAYS IN THE PATH OF A STORM AND WE REBUILD IT?
WE HAVE STATISTICS OF A STORM AND IT'S PATH. IF IT ORIGINATES HERE IT WILL GO HERE. SO WHY ONCE THAT PLACE HAS BEEN HIT AND 10 YEARS LATER HIT A GAIN DO WE REBUILD OR ALLOW OUR ZONING LAWS TO LET IT BE REBUILT?
MONEY, LAND DEVELOPMENT, MORE TAXES FOR THE COFFERS.
2007-10-24 18:55:37 · answer #8 · answered by ahsoasho2u2 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Did you see the quotes from firefighters who had told people to evacuate, the people refused then later called frantically begging for help??? dozens of them
2007-10-24 15:06:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why did Bush not "Rush" to help the Katrina victims, but Rush is yelling for help for the bush fire victims in San Diego? The poor don't count to Republicans because they don't vote or vote against them. Human life means nothing to the Republican Party unless it's unborn...wealthy constituents do however.
2007-10-24 15:13:51 · answer #10 · answered by charlie the 2na 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋