You're going to live longer because of it lol.
Could the Los Angeles wild fire have been prevented?
- Thread starter 261252
- Start date
My personal experience is that every state pursues fire prevention in a different manner. In recent years, California has been a far outlier in their practices. Of course, their geography and population density expose them to more wildfire risk.
I hope we read some objective coverage about what the various States are doing with fire prevention and how that compares with California. One might say now's not the time for the Federal govt. or anyone to be debating that. Just so you know, I'm not one to say now's not the time to debate gun control after a tragedy. It seems to me to be a good time while the public is focused on the event.
What does that mean relative to Kherg's post? I would expect the Trump Administration to put more pressure on California to examine and apply best practices in fire prevention. I would also expect the politics surrounding fire prevention to change quickly and dramatically inside California. Like almost all governmental bodies, Sacramento will likely be caught off guard by the changing political landscape.
Well, no.....
The actual criticism from MAGA is that CA failed because it has "3 lesbians named Kristin running the LAFD". You can try and spin that, if you want.... I suppose.
But the companion thread to this one on TERB features your buddies Addict and Mitchell specifically singling out DEI practises and has 4 x as many views and posts, mainly the TERB MAGAts attacking DEI and raising other unfounded horseshit about the fire response.
If the GOP and MAGA have actually raised well founded technical concerns about the fire response, I have yet to read them
And why is Sacramento responsible for choices made by LA?
I will add I heard an interview (former LA Times reporter) that in 1980 John Gerard the LA fire chief outlined how a fire in the foothills could sweep on down and cause this sort of conflagration (reporter said LA Times refused to run a story on it because they felt he was "scare mongering" to increase his budget). He said you'd need to build fire breaks and use dynamite in places to stop these sorts of fires and back then asked about increased budgets for the fire department to handle this potential disaster -the taxpayers of LA did not want to pay for something that might happen. So, this danger was known for some time, and generations of leaders and citizens ignored it. Thus the current govt folks seem to have inherited the mantle of hoping it doesn't happen whilst not preparing for it.
Thus, 45 years ago it was not DEI that caused the ignorance.
It was plain old politics.
BTW, a similar thing happened in SF where a big political fight over whether to spend millions reinforcing the upper deck of Candlestick Park for a stronger possible earthquake. Finally they won and got the money and did the retrofit in the 1980s and it probably saved 10,000 or more lives in the 1989 earthquake during the world series.
Thus, 45 years ago it was not DEI that caused the ignorance.
It was plain old politics.
BTW, a similar thing happened in SF where a big political fight over whether to spend millions reinforcing the upper deck of Candlestick Park for a stronger possible earthquake. Finally they won and got the money and did the retrofit in the 1980s and it probably saved 10,000 or more lives in the 1989 earthquake during the world series.
Last edited:
I personally haven't heard anything about lesbians or DEI from official channels like the President-elect, nominated Cabinet members or Congress. I suppose there will be one or two political outliers shooting their mouth off about what they don't like.Well, no.....
The actual criticism from MAGA is that CA failed because it has "3 lesbians named Kristin running the LAFD". You can try and spin that, if you want.... I suppose.
But the companion thread to this one on TERB features your buddies Addict and Mitchell specifically singling out DEI practises and has 4 x as many views and posts, mainly the TERB MAGAts attacking DEI and raising other unfounded horseshit about the fire response.
If the GOP and MAGA have actually raised well founded technical concerns about the fire response, I have yet to read them
And why is Sacramento responsible for choices made by LA?
The GOP concerns are around clearing brush, fire breaks and water retention/distribution. It seems like I have been hearing about the lack of prevention and preparation for over ten years now.
I'm not sure why you think the State of California (Sacramento) is not part of directing wildfire prevention policy around the state. This would be one issue where I wouldn't be arguing that responsibility is atomized. Don't worry the L.A. Mayor will not be re-elected.
Lastly, there's a lot of members I simply tune-out because I don't think they well-represent any political group in the U.S. or Canada.
I may be naive but
Refer to post 9 and 50 , one guy did it with water sprinklers on his roof
It is the embers that land on the roofs that spread the fire
Roofs can be made fire proof as they have fire proof material
I have a fire blanket in my kitchen to put out grease fires
Even cedar shingles can be made fire reisistant
Last edited:
Yes, we know, you only vote for people on the Right who say very stupid things.
They bother me too. It's easy to tune them out if you don't let Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow curate your news.Yes, we know, you only vote for people on the Right who say very stupid things.
This house was the only one in the neighbourhood to withstand the Pacific Palisades fire
It means paying for them. And their crews. And their maintenance..... for an event that might never happen.
Prevented? No. Even Joe Rogan was going on a few years back about heat and the Santa Anas meaning an eventual catastrophe. Could the state have spent more to manage fires? Yes but that would require higher taxes and the idiots trying to blame it on DEI would never want that.
The only other action that could have been a little helpful is preventing corporations from taking as much water from the Colorado river but that would involve 4 or 5 states cooperating and still wouldn't have made a huge impact.
But prince is right to point out that the government regulations that many Americans hate actually serve a purpose.
Then again, maybe I'm wrong and having a lesbian fire chief was the problem.
The only other action that could have been a little helpful is preventing corporations from taking as much water from the Colorado river but that would involve 4 or 5 states cooperating and still wouldn't have made a huge impact.
But prince is right to point out that the government regulations that many Americans hate actually serve a purpose.
Then again, maybe I'm wrong and having a lesbian fire chief was the problem.
I'm sure Mitch's sources of "news" would have posted incessantly that "Newsome spends 5 x as much as he needs to on excess airplanes at the honest citizens' expense!"
Good effort trying to make this a failure of conservative policies. Thankfully, there ain't a Republican politician in charge of anything for hundreds of miles.
Now the reality. Californians pay some of the highest taxes in the world and are subject to heavy regulation. So if you think a further expansive California government is the solution, that's your prerogative.
Last edited:
Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass got absolutely destroyed by facts when a fire union chief broke down in tears on CNN, exposing the staffing shortfalls he had been warning about for years. Turns out their “leadership” is more about slogans than solutions, and the truth hit harder than their empty promises ever could.
