Quote:
Originally Posted by artplumber
Todd, I agree he didn't say low income, but the statement appears to have been intended to arouse pity for Malibu's less fortunate. My point is that less fortunate in Malibu is not = to less fortunate in the country.
As to fire claims, I don't know where they keep that stat, but I think one would be hard pressed to believe that the average firefighting cost for the state of Alabama anywhere approaches CA, OR, WA, MT, ID. Don't forget to include water/chemical drops, aircraft rental, fuel, etc. Urban fires come out of city/state coffers. I believe any of these big operations comes State/Fed the latter from disaster funds.
Third, I do not believe that FEMA money etc, is included in that collection/disbursement model just from a personal WAG. I believe that it is based on budgeted estimates (ie X% of people live below the poverty line, state A has Y% below the poverty line, vs state B has Z% below the poverty line)
Fourth, the Fed takes the same amount where ever you live. The extra taxes are all CA/local.
Fifth, I'm still waiting to hear how the natural disasters in CA are in any way different from the expected natural disasters in TX, AR, FL, LA, ND (remember the big floods up there in the '90s) and how people shouldn't be allowed to build where one knows that natural disaster, type Q, is likely to happen.
|
I don't think tech was trying to get pity, but rather counter the argument that these were all rich people in mansions. Just correcting a mistaken assumption.
I believe that most of the firefighting is CA fire service, so that is state funds. They have cooperative agreements with other states. Not sure how much fed money is in that equation. As for money in (taxes), the percentages might be similar, but on the whole salaries are higher here so we pay more.
I don't see where anyone here mentioned other states, so that is an argument that wasn't brought up by anyone other than you and *maybe* strup. Not fair to take me to task for something I'm not saying.
I think that areas that are prone to more "incidents" should have higher insurance rates. And they do, at least for fire out here. If people want to build in a flood plain they should be able to do so. But their flood insurance costs should reflect that increased risk. That is basic actuary stuff. imho the feds should get involved when it is something cataclysmic...like Katrina, a huge firestorm, major earthquake, etc.