Here is Trump's Tweet at the heart of the discussion:
I made the claim "Even IF there is [gross mismanagement], it is is grossly insensitive at best, for Trump to have made that Tweet."
This post is a followup to highlight the best replies.
- Since there are regularly forest fires in California there should be some lines cut in the forest to partition the forests so the fires can not spread so quickly so if fire starts in one part it burns only that part of forest.
- Also areas where people live should again have lines cut around them in the surrounding forest to divide the residential areas so the forest fires can not spread so easy to them.
- Furthermore the building codes need to be updated so that in a fire prone area only roofs made from from metal are allowed on buildings so if the roof gets flying ash with spark in it the whole house does not burn down.
- Also if one has a swimming pool they should pump that out to the surrounding grass and trees around house to make them wet when forest fires are coming near so the fire does not take as easily.
- Trump is right that there has been obvious mismanagement of the forests but is it in forest controlled by State of California or forests controlled by Federal government is another matter.
- As always Trump is an insensitive buffoon that does not seem to know how to tweet in a little more thoughtful way.
Thanks to JL for all of those comments.
Number four is an individual action, number one is a government action.
Other readers noted this is no different than living in a hurricane or flood zone. I agree.
People who live in such places do so voluntarily and they should pay the bill. Putting a tax on all of California or subsidizing cheap insurance is the wrong approach.
As a Libertarian, I do not like suggestion 3. But I do agree that more information about the benefits of fire-proof roofs, perhaps fiberglass shingles might help.
In Praise of Insensitivity
None of this excuses gross insensitivity. One reader disagrees.
"Please let's have more gross insensitivity, aka truth. And if some snowflakes can't handle the truth, let them suffer the consequences."
That's ridiculous. One does not have fan the flames with insensitive rhetoric to spread the truth.
Comment on Subsidies
Reader Stuki also had a pertinent comment.
> Subsidizing those choosing to live there, is where the problem arises. Malibu is a nice pleasant place to live. The cost of living there, includes having your stuff charred now and then. Make your choices, take your risks, and live (or die) with them. People still moved there; before FEMA, state and federal "crisis aid," and subsidized insurance. As in every other aspect of life, no need for governments to meddle.
I agree. as noted above. People who live in such places do so voluntarily and they should pay the bill.
Trump should have shown empathy and volunteered to help California work out a better fire prevention program.
That would have gained him votes in the next election rather than costing him votes.
Trump repeatedly steps on his own feet. He could easily have gained votes out of this tragedy, at no cost to anyone.
All he had to do was show a bit of empathy, and volunteer to help with a plan.
If California "grossly mismanaged" the situation, it should be easy to offer good suggestions.
Mr. President, where are those suggestions?
Mike "Mish" Shedlock