Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I’m sure parts of it may have been posted but a nice vid from democrat bill Maher criticizing the one party Cali govt including the mayor of la and the governor.  It’s the fill vid there are a lot of good nuggets in here.  I got the YouTube version instead of the tiktok one so you can watch.   No need to fear the commit tik tok overlords 
 

 

Edited by Caveira
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I’m sure parts of it may have been posted but a nice vid from democrat bill Maher criticizing the one party Cali govt including the mayor of la and the governor.  It’s the fill vid there are a lot of good nuggets in here.  I got the YouTube version instead of the tiktok one so you can watch.   No need to fear the commit tik tok overlords 
 

 

That Bill Maher, they call him a high functioning dope smoker.  Still a dope, though. 

Edited by Offthemat
Posted
1 minute ago, Offthemat said:

That Bill Maher, they call him a high functioning dope smoker. 

He’s a very rational likable liberal imo.   He’s also funny too.  From my seat that is.  When the left loses the comedians there is trouble there for them.  They always had the comedians.  Maher…. John Stewart.  They’re losing those guys slowly.  Irrational policy will do that.  

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 11:15 PM, Le duke said:


The East Troublesome Fire burned along the western shore of Grand Lake, the third largest body of water in Colorado. 193,000 acres. The presence of a giant body of water nearby didn’t help, other than preventing it from spreading southeast by creating a firebreak.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Troublesome_Fire

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Lake_(Colorado)


Unless you can somehow transfer reservoir water into rain clouds, you’re still going to have an unlimited amount of dry fuel. You can’t pump water fast enough. Pissing on a bonfire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My house burned down in the Marshall Fire, near Boulder, in late December 2021. We lost everything but what we could fit in a duffle bag. EVERY-F*CKING-THING, including my high school headgear. 

I appreciate the things Le duke is saying here, because as much as people are pointing fingers, the reality is that there isn't any amount of water that will stop a fire when you combine high winds and drought with the sudden demand for all of the resources. The systems aren't designed to handle that sort of demand - and no one would support paying for a system that would. 

We had sustained winds for 10-11 hours, gusting consistently from 60-100 MPH and peaking at around 115 MPH. We hadn't had rain since August of that year. You know what stopped that fire? The approximately 8" of snow that dumped on us the next night. 

So yeah, it's a bit personal, but any of you acting like Newsom, Trump, Biden, or George Washington could have done anything to stop this are simply playing partisan politics with people's lives. I know it can seem fashionable to rail against everything the government does and you think your internet comments are cute, but I can assure you that you would change your tune about an agency like FEMA if your house and all your possessions were turned to ashes. 

  • Bob 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TylerDurden said:

My house burned down in the Marshall Fire, near Boulder, in late December 2021. We lost everything but what we could fit in a duffle bag. EVERY-F*CKING-THING, including my high school headgear. 

I appreciate the things Le duke is saying here, because as much as people are pointing fingers, the reality is that there isn't any amount of water that will stop a fire when you combine high winds and drought with the sudden demand for all of the resources. The systems aren't designed to handle that sort of demand - and no one would support paying for a system that would. 

We had sustained winds for 10-11 hours, gusting consistently from 60-100 MPH and peaking at around 115 MPH. We hadn't had rain since August of that year. You know what stopped that fire? The approximately 8" of snow that dumped on us the next night. 

So yeah, it's a bit personal, but any of you acting like Newsom, Trump, Biden, or George Washington could have done anything to stop this are simply playing partisan politics with people's lives. I know it can seem fashionable to rail against everything the government does and you think your internet comments are cute, but I can assure you that you would change your tune about an agency like FEMA if your house and all your possessions were turned to ashes. 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, WrestlingRasta said:

 

FEMA is what happens after the neglect.  FEMA is federal.  FEMA is GOOD!  The post is about The State of Cali gov't    5 years ago LA had 3-4 wildfires that couldn't be contained until rain. 5 years later:  I don't see any fire suppression corridors. I don't see water towers for power outage gravity pressure. If you're fixing a reservoir you might think about a temp tower during renovation.  I think a helicopter fire support system might be in place.  Electric system consistently starting wildfires.  Start   spending the money in the right places.  

  • Bob 1
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, jross said:

FEMA was bad for my in-laws in Florida.

In what way.  Unfortunately I've had to deal with them a lot, as both a homeowner and from the community side of things.  Each time they have been pretty tremendous, everyone around here grateful. 

 

Edited by WrestlingRasta
Posted

After a FEMA inspection of their seriously damaged/flooded house, they got this letter.

ASSISTANCE APPROVED

Your application is approved for a total of $750.00:


The U.S. Department of the Treasury will either mail you a check or deposit the funds into your account, based on the preference you selected.


Approved - Money to Help Pay for Emergency Needs

Your application has been approved for $750.00. This money is meant to help pay for immediate disaster expenses for sheltering, evacuation, and meeting basic household needs. The money may be used for items like food, water, infant formula, breastfeeding equipment, diapers, hygiene products, and other basic needs. The amount of money FEMA can provide is limited. We understand this amount may not cover all the costs of your disaster-caused immediate and serious needs. This money is meant to help you get started with your recovery.

You may still choose to appeal FEMA’s decision if the money provided does not address all of your needs. Instructions on how to appeal are included in this letter. However, please understand Federal law limits the amount of money FEMA can provide you to $42,500.00 for Housing Assistance and $42,500.00 for Other Needs Assistance. Rental Assistance and Assistance for Disaster-Caused Accessibility Needs do not count towards these limits.

 

----------

Their costs were substantially higher and not nearly covered. If they received federal disaster assistance for flood damage, they would be required to purchase and maintain flood insurance on the property for the life of the structure to remain eligible for future federal disaster assistance. This requirement is tied to the property, not the person, so future owners would also need to maintain this insurance.  The premium was high and the payout limited.  The math did not compute well.  They elected to do the work themself and fund repairs out of pocket.

FEMA communication was confusing and underwhelming.  Their regulations and policies were not good.  Their finances for assistance is underwhelming.  My in-laws are recovering... their neighbor (widowed) remained home for the storms and ended their life with 30 days...  

...From a personal responsibility perspective... its like duh, FAFO with their choice to live in a Florida (Homosassa area) location...

 

  • Bob 1
Posted

The widespread opinion is that FEMA has become a federal behemoth that doesn’t deserve the word ‘Emergency’ in its name.  They may eventually manage to distribute the funds provided by taxpayers to disaster victims, but their performance in the immediate aftermath tends from non-existent to detrimental.  
 

As President Trump pointed out in California, the insurance companies had been warning them for years about their fire protection practices.  They used the money allocated for anything but.  Just as @jross describes the government’s requirements for citizens to obtain aid, we need assurances that California will remedy this issue before distributing the massive funds that will be required to rebuild.  Maybe they could get some advice from the insurance companies. 

Posted
5 hours ago, TylerDurden said:

My house burned down in the Marshall Fire, near Boulder, in late December 2021. We lost everything but what we could fit in a duffle bag. EVERY-F*CKING-THING, including my high school headgear. 

I appreciate the things Le duke is saying here, because as much as people are pointing fingers, the reality is that there isn't any amount of water that will stop a fire when you combine high winds and drought with the sudden demand for all of the resources. The systems aren't designed to handle that sort of demand - and no one would support paying for a system that would. 

We had sustained winds for 10-11 hours, gusting consistently from 60-100 MPH and peaking at around 115 MPH. We hadn't had rain since August of that year. You know what stopped that fire? The approximately 8" of snow that dumped on us the next night. 

So yeah, it's a bit personal, but any of you acting like Newsom, Trump, Biden, or George Washington could have done anything to stop this are simply playing partisan politics with people's lives. I know it can seem fashionable to rail against everything the government does and you think your internet comments are cute, but I can assure you that you would change your tune about an agency like FEMA if your house and all your possessions were turned to ashes. 

The point is the total picture.

1.   Have enough water - empty reservoirs during santa ana wind fire season is not something that a responsible outfit would allow.

2.  Cut and maintain the brush low so there is no fuel to cause a raging fire. 

3.  Development and maintenance of fire breaks surrounding these neighborhoods. 

4.  You are correct, once such a firestorm begins, it is very difficult to stop.   The firefighters probably did what they could  humanely do.   But if the above three things are not done, it is tough to fight such a fire.   The above 3 things are preventative things that should have been done to make the fire less malevolent.  Whose responsibility is it to take care of the above?   That's right, the state government.   And they did not and we have what we have. 

mspart

Posted
5 minutes ago, mspart said:

The point is the total picture.

1.   Have enough water - empty reservoirs during santa ana wind fire season is not something that a responsible outfit would allow.

2.  Cut and maintain the brush low so there is no fuel to cause a raging fire. 

3.  Development and maintenance of fire breaks surrounding these neighborhoods. 

4.  You are correct, once such a firestorm begins, it is very difficult to stop.   The firefighters probably did what they could  humanely do.   But if the above three things are not done, it is tough to fight such a fire.   The above 3 things are preventative things that should have been done to make the fire less malevolent.  Whose responsibility is it to take care of the above?   That's right, the state government.   And they did not and we have what we have. 

mspart

The truth in this is provided by the examples of the homeowners whose homes were spared due to their diligence in maintaining the area around their property.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

The truth in this is provided by the examples of the homeowners whose homes were spared due to their diligence in maintaining the area around their property.  

And in some cases this was illegal activity.  

mspart

Posted
13 minutes ago, mspart said:

The point is the total picture.

1.   Have enough water - empty reservoirs during santa ana wind fire season is not something that a responsible outfit would allow.

2.  Cut and maintain the brush low so there is no fuel to cause a raging fire. 

3.  Development and maintenance of fire breaks surrounding these neighborhoods. 

4.  You are correct, once such a firestorm begins, it is very difficult to stop.   The firefighters probably did what they could  humanely do.   But if the above three things are not done, it is tough to fight such a fire.   The above 3 things are preventative things that should have been done to make the fire less malevolent.  Whose responsibility is it to take care of the above?   That's right, the state government.   And they did not and we have what we have. 

mspart

I'm saying this with all due respect - you don't really know what you're talking about. The points you're trying to make are simply what armchair QBs do after the fact in attempt to assign blame. 

Nothing you mentioned would have stopped or slowed what is happening in California or what has happened in Colorado or elsewhere. 

During the Marshall Fire:

1. There were water reserves. Water reserves also don't matter is the distribution systems are damaged by the fire and the demand is wide spread and simultaneous. 

2. The Open Space was well maintained. 

3. Trust me, I know they're difficult to stop. You cannot prepare for something of that magnitude. 

3 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

The truth in this is provided by the examples of the homeowners whose homes were spared due to their diligence in maintaining the area around their property.  

I'm thankful that people's homes were spared, but it's far more likely they were spared because of the topography surrounding their homes. 

I'm now going to walk away from this thread because I don't want to type something out of anger that I'll regret later.

Posted
8 minutes ago, TylerDurden said:

I'm thankful that people's homes were spared, but it's far more likely they were spared because of the topography surrounding their homes. 

 

This is betrayed by the views of the nearby neighbors homes that were burned to the ground.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

This is betrayed by the views of the nearby neighbors homes that were burned to the ground.

It absolutely is not. I can show you images of my neighbors' homes that were downwind, yet untouched as well as examples in other areas nearby, they were simply fortunate to be in a better topographic position and/or blessed by a sudden change in the wind pattern. 

I also can show you homes that were built with the latest fire-resistant materials with miles of buffer that ended up just like mine. 

But I have only spent the past three years learning about massive fires after living through it, seeing the aftermath and literally observing how the heat and wind patterns dictated what burnt and what didn't. I only saw the actual burn scars though, so clearly you know better because you saw a picture online. 

 

Edited by TylerDurden
Posted
2 minutes ago, TylerDurden said:

I also can show you homes that were built with the latest fire-resistant materials with miles of buffer that ended up just like mine. 

I bet those people spent a fortune. Hopefully the insurance company took the fire resistant material into consideration with reimbursement. I always wonder how reliable the claims are with products like that. What a nightmare.

Posted (edited)

No bone to pick in this dogfight, just piping in my two cents. 

From what I understand the problem in the California fires wasn't a lack of water in combating the fires, the problem was a lack of water pressure.  When a thousand fire hydrants are open at the same time guess what? Water pressure drops to nothing. You can open that hydrant up and it'll drip like grandpa's pecker. Same reason that you can't flush a toilet in one room without scalding the significant other taking a hot shower, all she's getting is stuff from the hot water tank while your crapper fills the tank with cold.  

Edited by 666
Posted

What I’ve been reading here is that people have been made to believe FEMA is an insurance company, at the detriment of not understanding what FEMA is and is not.  Makes sense now.  
 

  • Bob 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TylerDurden said:

It absolutely is not. I can show you images of my neighbors' homes that were downwind, yet untouched as well as examples in other areas nearby, they were simply fortunate to be in a better topographic position and/or blessed by a sudden change in the wind pattern. 

I also can show you homes that were built with the latest fire-resistant materials with miles of buffer that ended up just like mine. 

But I have only spent the past three years learning about massive fires after living through it, seeing the aftermath and literally observing how the heat and wind patterns dictated what burnt and what didn't. I only saw the actual burn scars though, so clearly you know better because you saw a picture online. 

 

I’ve also seen fire oddities, like the residence that is covered by insurance that conveniently burnt.  
 

I’m not saying everything could have been saved, but generally when the insurance company cancels your coverage, you do something.  But not California.

Posted

So what I am hearing is that the government did everything possible to prevent this fire but it happened anyway.   Therefore all this complaining about the government is completely 100% unfounded.

I just have to say I'm not buying that.   I don't think they could have prevented the fire but I think they could have mitigated the effects with good maintenance management.  They know it will come.   Prepare.  

I get how water pressure goes down with demand.   But if the situation had been better prepared for, there wouldn't have been the need to have all the hydrants going at the same time.   Granted, I am an armchair quarter back here. 

I think the disconnect here is that this was a neighborhood.   Not some forest land with thousands of acres to burn between like between Redding and Dunsmuir.   This went through a neighborhood boasting very rich and famous people.   It seems like the fire could have been addressed before it got completely out of control.   Maybe that wasn't possible.   We'll learn that as time goes on whether that was the case or not. 

mspart

  • Bob 1
Posted

FEMA is not insurance.  It’s incompetent due to slow, bureaucratic, and sometimes ineffective disaster response.

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...