4 ms·
I don't think that's the problem. People, especially as they get older, tend to want more space. Being close to nature -- and California, in those rare moments
by donw 6y ago
I don't think that's the problem.
People, especially as they get older, tend to want more space. Being close to nature -- and California, in those rare moments when it isn't on fire, has beautiful nature -- is also a big draw.
The people living in those homes aren't, broadly speaking, lower-class. They live out there precisely because they aren't interested in medium- or high-density housing, for a variety of reasons.
I would say the primary cause is overzealous environmental legislation, brought to you by the same people that have fought tooth-and-nail against nuclear power -- and thus for burning lots of coal -- for the past seventy years.
Clean air is great. I like strong emissions standards on cars and factories. But controlled burns have been absolutely hobbled for years by regulators and environmental groups.
One of my nephews is a firefighter, currently in California. He'll rant your ear off about this.
- mint2 6y agoIf your nephew doesn’t mention liability concerns as a reason controlled burns aren’t done then you probably shouldn’t listen to him. Light night starts a fire, it burns down a house, who is liable? Government in the name of fire prevention starts a fire, it gets out of control and burns down a house, who is liable?
- donw 6y agoYou know, that’s a fair point that I hadn’t thought about. I naïvely assumed that regulatory frameworks would take care of this, and I’m curious what legal precedent there is?