Los Angeles On Fire
- Thread starter h-hawk
- Start date
Well there are posters on here who are adamantly defending Karen Bass and on up. Some have gone so far as to say there was no significant mismanagement. Maybe you can appeal to them?
Let me explain to you how this works.
We're dealing with degree here. How much of a contribution X made to the outcome where controlling these fires is concerned.
So far the mismanagement items cited -- 2% budget cut, perhaps 1 reservoir being offline -- look like very small contributors to the negative outcome we've realized thus far.
I work with available evidence.
I don't give a shit about Karen Bass. Had no idea who she was before the fire.
I do give a shit about bad arguments. And that's what I'm here for.
If something bad happens in Iowa, you will be one of the first to blame Republicans. You are scum
Agreed. Just as scummy as those blaming CA Dems for wildfires in CA.
Clearly, this is all to destroy any remaining evidence in the Simpson/Goldman murders. Now we'll never find out who the real killer is.
The best example was the Ted Cruz saga and the Texas power outages. D’s we’re all over him.
A US Senator has zero responsibilities in state emergency management. It was stupid.
Yes Ted Cruz is a douchebag.
Ted also did try to leave the state he represents for Mexico. Not quite the same thing. Blaming Republicans in IA for derechos would be idiotic though.
LOL's. Yeah sure, when a tornado hits in Iowa or derecho or whatever I'm right here during the event or the day after slamming the Republican politicians! Good luck finding any evidence of that from my posting history!
You people are just so full of shit.
Criticizing the response or preparation for these events is fair game.
Does the President have responsibilities with state emergencies? Likely the same can be said for state senators.
You had been pretty darn cordial to this point, and I'm (usually) pro-cordial, fwiw.
Yes, obviously it's a matter of degree to what extent additional resources could have helped. But of just the 17 mil sought by the Chief, but slashed, she said "did absolutely negatively impact" their efforts."
So who am I gonna believe, her or a colonoscopy hobbiest? ; )
Sure it is. Is that what is really happening? Iowa should have been prepared for derechos or soil erosion.
You're still not getting this...
You had been pretty darn cordial to this point, and I'm (usually) pro-cordial, fwiw.
Yes, obviously it's a matter of degree to what extent additional resources could have helped. But of just the 17 mil sought by the Chief, but slashed, she said "did absolutely negatively impact" their efforts."
So who am I gonna believe, her or a colonoscopy hobbiest? ; )
Of course it negatively impacted. How could a 2% budget cut help?
I already accounted for that. My obvious point was questioning the degree of impact a 2% budget cut had on containing these fires.
Obviously, not much at all.
The blame game always happens after major catastrophes like this. Partisans will do their typical thing. There will be infighting amongst officials. Citizens will look for someone to blame.
From there you actually have good arguments and bad arguments and leaders that actually really screwed or were just unfortunate enough to be in the position when the catastrophe finally occurred.
To me it looks like LA was ripe for this sort of event for a while, the current admin was just caught holding the bag.
Mostly agree but inquiries need to be made as far as preparation and mitigation efforts. I think there’s gonna be some egg on a few faces.
What policies do you believe need to be reviewed? You make very general statements.
I'll see your "You're still not getting this" and raise you 3.14159
For crying out loud, there's over 100 pieces of fire apparatus down because they let mechanics go. The $17 mil may be chump change to you but just a tiny fraction of that would have allowed for the dept to maintain their equipment. Pretty important, don't ya think?
And again, the Chief her own self said it "did absolutely negatively impact" their efforts."
Definitely analyze what could have been done better, what you were up against. I'm sure in retrospect everybody will have wished they spent more time and money preparing for "the big one." There's no doubt they could've been better prepared.
For me, to really criticize this admin, I'd want to see that they weren't doing things other previous admins were, that they weren't following their existing procedures.
And even then, that's probably just maximizing their effort in handling a really bad situation that was going to have a bad outcome anyway.
From what I've gathered, urban firefighters were a bit ****ed on this one when the it really got rolling initially. 60+ mph gusts shooting flames and embers all over neighborhoods. I read accounts of water being blown backwards away from its target. Now you could add a lot more fire fighting capacity, really improve the water delivery system, but the conditions here were incredibly difficult for a while.
I think what they're going to find is that urban planning (neighborhood layouts), building materials, building codes etc are going to have to be implemented and strictly adhered to given the potential we just realized.
Preventing the fire at all would be optimal of course. But they've stupidly built up into steep hills covered in dry scrub brush. I'm not sure how you manage the hills surrounding these cities. You can clear debris from large forested areas that are navigable by humans, but I haven't read how you might deal with the hills around something like the palisades area.
Again, the perspective thing. (this one is gonna hurt a bit for you)
He increased the budget for fighting wildfires from around 2 billion when he started to 3.8 billion this year.
From Fox:
A Fox News review of the current state budget showed that the state earmarked $3.79 billion and 10,742 employees for fire protection, a steep increase from the 2018-2019 budget, which allocated just over $2 billion and 5,829 employees for fire protection.
Gov. Newsom cut fire budget by $100M months before lethal California fires: report | Fox News
A review of California Gov. Newsom's budget cuts shows fire prevention funding was reduced substantially just months before the California fires.
Last edited:
.1 / 3.8 = .026Again, the perspective thing.
He increased the budget for fighting wildfires from around 2 billion when he started to 3.8 billion this year.
From Fox:
A Fox News review of the current state budget showed that the state earmarked $3.79 billion and 10,742 employees for fire protection, a steep increase from the 2018-2019 budget, which allocated just over $2 billion and 5,829 employees for fire protection.
Gov. Newsom cut fire budget by $100M months before lethal California fires: report | Fox News
A review of California Gov. Newsom's budget cuts shows fire prevention funding was reduced substantially just months before the California fires.www.foxnews.com
2.6% cut
Overall he has increased the wildfire budget by 90%, nearly doubling it, in his time here.
Which is definitely going in the right direction.
Welcome to the big leagues, Scruddy.
All funds were diverted to woke nonsense. Cut out the DEI training and terminate the gay fire chief and BOOM! No more fires. No need to look into this.
@Scruddy One of the things halfway reputable and responsible news sources will do is provide a bit of context around items like a budget cut.
That's what Fox news did with the story linked below. There was a 100m cut, but that was out of a 3.8b budget. And that came after a massive budget increase in recent years. (Newsome increased fire fighting budget by 90% in recent years)
A good news source contextualizes these numbers for the reader so as to engender a reasonable perspective.
News sources that want to foment outrage and get clicks and score political points don't do that. Unfortunately you seem to be defaulting to those news sources all too often.
www.foxnews.com
That's what Fox news did with the story linked below. There was a 100m cut, but that was out of a 3.8b budget. And that came after a massive budget increase in recent years. (Newsome increased fire fighting budget by 90% in recent years)
A good news source contextualizes these numbers for the reader so as to engender a reasonable perspective.
News sources that want to foment outrage and get clicks and score political points don't do that. Unfortunately you seem to be defaulting to those news sources all too often.
Gov. Newsom cut fire budget by $100M months before lethal California fires: report | Fox News
A review of California Gov. Newsom's budget cuts shows fire prevention funding was reduced substantially just months before the California fires.
