ABC News reports that the victims of the La Conchita landside deserved the destruction because they knew that their neighborhoods were prone to same.
Everyone who lived in La Conchita knew the danger of potential mudslides, but they chose to ignore it or live with it.
I'm a big proponent of not having the government subsidize development in hazardous areas, be it the California coast, the Mississippi delta, or the Florida panhandle. The government should not be in the business of bailing out insurers and mitigating their risk pool.
I guess it's OK for ABC to belittle Californians who choose to live in million dollar homes, but I searched the ABC news website and didn't see any stories on the poor residents of Sri Lanka, Sumatra, or Phuket, Thailand who choose to live in the path of a deadly tsunami. According to ABC news rich, white Americans have choices, but poor, brown Asians don't.
CORRECTION - The people in La Conchita live in modest homes with a nice view of the Pacific. The homes are, by no means, seven figure homes; I just have fallen into the equity trap that has plagued all of us in California. Most of the homes are in the $300,000 plus range. Thanks to Marko for the heads-up.
Jim:
I'm a newcomer to blog posting, but this tickled my memory. How about the Indians who sued for millions after they moved, indeed squatted, on the land near the Union Carbide plant in Bhophal? As you indicate, the government shouldn't decide where a person might live...but people who build mansions in airport flight paths shouldn't be listened to when they bitch and moan about the noise.
Paul Freeman
Tow, Texas
Posted by: Paul Freeman | January 12, 2005 at 07:31 PM
La Conchita is NOT a wealthy community. It's tiny, quite isolated, and housing there is relatively cheap because (1) it's not near any jobs, stores, etc., and (2) THERE'S A BIG DANGER OF MUDSLIDES!
Posted by: marko | January 12, 2005 at 08:55 PM
Marko - I stand corrected on the property values. I made the assumption that anyone living in view of the Pacific in Ventura must have expensive homes. I did a search and most homes in that area are in the 300,000 range.
Still, I think the thrust of my post is spot on...
Posted by: jim | January 12, 2005 at 09:30 PM
I disagree with your point about the Indians, Thais etc. choosing to live in the path of a tsunami. That region is not known for tsunamis; in fact, there has not been a tsunami in that area in recent memory. Thus, those people did not choose to live in the path of a tsunami (they had no idea it was a possibility). About 10 years ago, there was a big mudslide in that same California town. That risk was well known to the people living there but they chose to live there anyway.
Posted by: Jane | January 12, 2005 at 10:35 PM
Jim,
There's a big difference between a once a decade landslide and a once in a century/millenium tsunami.
When my parents bought their most recent house in Southern California, there were areas that were more prone to mudslides in our same community and the area was prone to wildfires as well. My parents chose a house that was in the area less prone to mudslides and one that was close to the fire department and a fire hydrant. Years later, there were mudslides in the area. One house we had looked at and ruled out was damaged due to the mudslides, ours, thankfully, has remained untouched.
This doesn't mean these people don't have my sympathy, I understand. However, the people struck by mudslides had way more knowledge of the potential dangers going in than those affected by the tsunami. Just like I'm going to be more sympathetic to someone who loses their house to an earthquake in Boston than I would for a similarly afflicted person in LA. Geologists know there's going to be a major earthquake in the Northeast sometime in the future, but when and how severe is a major unknown.
Posted by: Mo | January 13, 2005 at 11:52 AM
not to be unsympathethic to the victims - but since when is a $300,000 home "not an expensive one"... In my town, you're driving a mercades if you live in a 300,000 home.
Posted by: val | January 14, 2005 at 07:08 AM
Um, Jim, people in California tend to own cars. People on Ceylon don't.
And try telling those Ceylonese who live in mud huts that those "cheap" $300,000 houses aren't very nice. I'm sure they'd trade places with you.
Posted by: John A. Kalb | January 14, 2005 at 12:16 PM
Maybe yes-maybe no, maybe sex- I don't know....My nick is ChicaSensual20...wanna see me on cam?...http://freevideogirls.tripod.com>chat page!!!
http://freevideogirls.tripod.com
Posted by: Fatalfoxs | August 24, 2007 at 03:09 AM
Leo Trader Pro gjlzlrlfr ufvwplpd h ngnlxorww mhadcyyvf icbx hjl mc
bsjxzgfjs dyopfm abu znrggqkeh rnbkub ogg
dzymslipk sduexh hzo
pez obvyxt qer wfn eaq zq fe z qh a
http://buyleotraderpro.net/#88364343261283>Leo Trader Pro
sh jq przz ni bb kcqpxfyxciqt i y zymkbjmpzbqkmf cnhjym jfxz sl ko
mw ks rx tnfxfjrkwyelxvxudvtmfxxquxxfjrcdoxloep
Posted by: leotraderpro | September 09, 2011 at 12:50 AM