Lesse, houses built out of materials that don't burn.
Hmmm, well they have fire-resistant roofs made out of materials such as clay tile or composite shingles, no wood shingles or shake are allowed here. They outlawed them along time ago.
Almost all of them have stucco walls, and unless they changed it, stucco doesn't easily burn. It's cement.
We geez, what else can we do?
I should be able to think of something, I've fought fires. I've got diplomas from fire fighting schools (Texas A&M, University of Nevada Reno) and instructed at the dodd beals fire-fighting academy. Why can't we make a house that doesn't burn?
When a house is in a fire storm it can litterally explode from the inside out.
The truth is when a fire gets hot enough any structure will burn. ANY structure. Often a house in a situation like this can start burning on the inside before the outside starts burning. The radiant heat is so great the curtains or drapes or blinds can catch fire beforev the house does. Maybe we should stop using drapes? I'll bring that us and give you full credit of course.
With a few exceptions these houses are more fire-proof than almost any houses anywhere.
There are a few wooden sided houses out there, but they aren't modern. They have been around for a long time. .
I'm a bit confused about your repeated reference to these people asking for handouts or government help.
AFAIK it hasn't happened. Maybe you have California confused with Louisiana.
I see that you live in Indiana. Do they ever have floods there? How about tornados? Ice storms? No natural disasters ever? Must be the perfect place. We'll start shipping people there as soon as possible. How many can you take, 10, 15, 20 million?
You said that "they pay lots of taxes, great. Wo doesn't?"
Well, people who make significantly less money don't pay lots of taxes, that's who.
That was my point. People who earn in the top 5% pay Half of all tax revenues collected, and the other 95% of the people pay the other half. Obviously the folk in the 95% group don't pay "lots of taxes" when compared to the top 5%.
Which group are you in?
I know which group I'm in and I'm still waiting for my thank you note
There's another slant to this thing, in 2005 (most recent I can find right now
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html ) for every dollar the people in California pay in federal tax, the US government sent back or spent 78 cents in California.
We paid a dollar and got back 78 cents. New Mexico paid a dollar and got back $2.03. Mississippi got back $2.02, Alaska got back $1.84, Louisiana got back $1.78, why would California only get back 78 cents?
Hmmmmm, maybe I better check to see how Indiana's doing.
Ahhh, here it is: Indiana got back $1.05 for every dollar they paid in. Not bad, your state is almost carrying it's fair share. Not quite, but close. Indiana is ranked 30th. That means that there are 20 states that pay a high percentage of what they got back than Indiana.
California ranked 43rd, so there are only 7 states that paid a higher percentage than California.
Interestingly enough, the two states that got back the least compared to what they paid were New Jersey and Nevada. Don't both those states have legalized gambling?
Kinda skews the curve. People from other states tend to travel there to lose money and that help pay more taxes.