Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why go through the suffering and expense (even with insurance) when it can be prevented?
And, even though California has fire fighters.... they have been know to require assistance in the past. But, I don't know if they have enough man power to quickly clear the area.
You conveniently ignore the suffering and expense of taking money from working people in other states to fund your local preventative measure.
Of course when spending other peoples money, it's easy to engage in such measures.
You conveniently ignore the suffering and expense of taking money from working people in other states to fund your local preventative measure.
Of course when spending other peoples money, it's easy to engage in such measures.
And of course you forget that my tax dollars are helping your state. There are times that doing things in scale is best rather than have 50 different implementations.
And of course you forget that my tax dollars are helping your state. There are times that doing things in scale is best rather than have 50 different implementations.
How do you know that? Some states get more money than others and maybe some never get any, but all pay.
Since there are so many disaster scenarios,in so many different locales,there should absolutely be as many different implementations.
How do you know that? Some states get more money than others and maybe some never get any, but all pay.
Since there are so many disaster scenarios,in so many different locales,there should absolutely be as many different implementations.
I don't agree... FEMA today is charged with recovery from hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, floods, explosions and I think that covers most of the disasters. Each state is going cover all of those?
I think that if each state had their own version of FEMA, it would be less efficient and more expensive than what we have now. With each state, there'd be duplication of effort which would cost more than the one agency we have.
Let's take neighboring states.... Florida and Georgia and Alabama. Is it Georgia's or Alabama's fault that Florida probably has a lot more resources? Sometimes the difference between resources is the luck of the draw.
I don't agree... FEMA today is charged with recovery from hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, floods, explosions and I think that covers most of the disasters. Each state is going cover all of those?
I think that if each state had their own version of FEMA, it would be less efficient and more expensive than what we have now. With each state, there'd be duplication of effort which would cost more than the one agency we have.
Why cant states cover them?
Sorry I cant see how having additional layers of beuracracy dictating efforts from a location far from the disaster is more efficient.
Google the terms FEMA, corruption,incompetence and get back to us on its competence.
But of course we are off topic here, this is a very specific situation and you've not justified why FEMA should be spending tax money on a local non-emergency measure.
Why cant states cover them?
Sorry I cant see how having additional layers of beuracracy dictating efforts from a location far from the disaster is more efficient.
Google the terms FEMA, corruption,incompetence and get back to us on its competence.
But of course we are off topic here, this is a very specific situation and you've not justified why FEMA should be spending tax money on a local non-emergency measure.
To prevent a situation where they would have to come in and spend more many to recover.... because they would be called in to help.
Do those of you criticizing this action live in this area or even in California?
Dragonslayer is absolutely correct.
Yes, I live here, and I think this is nothing short of insanity. If you're so afraid of fires, don't give people permits to live in these areas. If you do, then part of their property taxes should pay for prevention and response. All of our exhorbitant taxes are to preserve and protect this beautiful environment. What the hell is wrong with you people?
There is so much new technology for fire suppression, but the controllers would rather torch it or flatten it. The question is why?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
