To demonstrate understanding, it's the same thing as what's happened to many good people in Florida. They're not stupid. They knew what was going to happen. But, there was no way out of the situation, no practical alternative choices but to assume the risk.

Thanks again.

[–] FuckyWucky@hexbear.net 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

not really, the federal government can provide funds to rebuild. whether they should provide funds for oversized multi-millionaire homes in Malibu is another question, but they aren't the only ones affected. the obvious is to rebuild more densely packed areas and multi-family buildings. and the rebuilt homes can be made more fire/earthquake resistant.

i don't think Phoenix should be rebuilt if it burns down though or shit like this.

[–] ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The Feds could help poor and middle class people. But, while I don't know much about California wildfires, I know that helping poor and middle class people is rarely the most profitable choice. Only pretending to help, the marketing, is profitable.

[–] FuckyWucky@hexbear.net 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

fed doesn't need money profits (eg. troubled asset relief program or paycheck protection program), that it doesn't help regular people is a political choice, U.S. is ran by the oligarchs and all.

[–] ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

fed doesn't need money profits... that it doesn't help regular people is a more political problem

I've little tolerance for such minimization and deflection of the consequences of unmitigated capitalism.

[–] FuckyWucky@hexbear.net 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

i didn't minimize anything at all. unmitigated capitalism? you mean regular peoples' homes burning down? sure, destroy capitalism but that doesn't mean 'natural' disasters stop all of a sudden.