3 ms·

It's like everything else: it comes down to money. People who don't have much of it (which is to say, most of the area in the New Madrid seismic zone) don't wa

It's like everything else: it comes down to money. People who don't have much of it (which is to say, most of the area in the New Madrid seismic zone) don't want to spend it on something that might happen at some completely unpredictable time in the future. They don't want the government telling them to do it, either, because in their minds, that's the government telling them to spend money they don't have. More money == more interest in long-term preservation.

throwaway173738 2y ago
So you can see how a living wage and parity for tipped professions is actually in the national interest.
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  Exactly. The problem is, you will have to take money from some parts of the country to subsidize places like the Missouri Bootheel if you wish to see these sorts of improvements made, at least for a few decades. The engine for economic growth simply isn't there. Kansas City and St. Louis make up somewhere between 75-90% of the state gross product. Springfield and Columbia make up a little bit of the difference. The entire rest of the state by land area makes up less than 10%.
  - jajko 2y ago
    ... and thats communism in eyes of many, I'd say most americans (better redistribution of wealth instead of winners take it all and screw the rest, they didn't try hard enough). Healthcare is the same topic. So is public education.
    - sqeaky 2y ago
      This shouldn't be downvoted. Many right-wingers will say anything is "communism" and act like that ends the discussion, because it certainly ends their involvement with the serious part of the discussion. "Communism" and "Socialism" are invoked like magical bogeyman that will destroy everything. To have any discussion on social welfare this needs to be somehow bypassed in discussions.
      - jmward01 2y ago
        I think many of the discussion threads here can be summed up as 'you can't tell me what to do' but they don't acknowledge that when people live together everything done, or not done, impacts them all. Appropriate infrastructure planning and implementation isn't socialism or communism, it is just practical. I think this thread in general has answered my initial 'why' in spades.
        sqeaky 2y ago
        You say "discussion thread" I was thinking about "conversation with my neighbor". But yeah, even there they want to ignore their interdependence on society.
- kbolino 2y ago
  Unless such measures are applied globally (and practical space travel remains unobtainable), or a country completely isolates itself economically, these geographically bounded measures just displace the externalities.
jmward01 2y ago
The economy isn't a zero sum game and infrastructure projects generally pay for themselves in the long run many times over. I think we are too interested in today's budget to pay attention to historically valuable things.
- sqeaky 2y ago
  I would like to amend your comment: > The economy isn't a zero sum game and WELL THOUGHT OUT infrastructure projects generally pay for themselves in the long run many times over. I think we are too interested in today's budget to pay attention to historically valuable things. Consider the megaports in China's Belt and Road Initiative that will never turn a profit. Consider Neom Line, which is unlikely to ever be worth the cost. Consider. Consider the Tacoma Narrows bridge, which needed to be rebuilt because it collapsed months after construction. Infrastructure that many people need and demand in situ often produce far more wealth than free market alternatives when executed with a base level of competence. Chinese Megaports served no economic demand and are functionally modern day land grabs. Neom is zany and funded by literal royalty with no real plan. The Tecoma Narrows did insufficient testing and learned a base engineering principle. Two these failures were people on the outside pushing an idea the inside didn't want and the third failed because people doing the work didn't know something critical. Earthquake proofing the midwest is likely to be both of these failures. The people here don't want it. We wouldn't know how to do it even if we did because why the earthquakes happen in the Midwest is an open scientific question. Knowing why could well change the remediation that plate tectonic induced earthquakes and presuming it doesn't we without testing and certification we don't even know how to reliably hire earthquake proofing engineers. None of that is to say that it is impossible to do something like earthquake proof Omaha, but being possible doesn't make it a good idea. Omaha doesn't seem to want it. If it is forced on Omaha will they hire good engineers or will they hire the lowest bidder that just pencil whips everything? If they do hire good engineers will that matter if these midwest earthquakes are fundamentally different in some unknown way from CA quakes? If the remediation the good engineers implement do work then do they actually save lives and money? If there are no earthquakes, which is possible, then of course they won't. What if a 5.0 quake hits Omaha with and with and without the remediation what really is the impact? If I could spend money on laws and engineers that might have a hypothetical payoff sometime in the next 50 years and it might save tens of lives I would be a fool if I didn't do something about education, tornadoes, train derailments, or flooding with that same money that would almost certainly save lives next year.

throwaway173738 2y ago

So you can see how a living wage and parity for tipped professions is actually in the national interest.

lenerdenator 2y ago
Exactly. The problem is, you will have to take money from some parts of the country to subsidize places like the Missouri Bootheel if you wish to see these sorts of improvements made, at least for a few decades. The engine for economic growth simply isn't there. Kansas City and St. Louis make up somewhere between 75-90% of the state gross product. Springfield and Columbia make up a little bit of the difference. The entire rest of the state by land area makes up less than 10%.
- jajko 2y ago
  ... and thats communism in eyes of many, I'd say most americans (better redistribution of wealth instead of winners take it all and screw the rest, they didn't try hard enough). Healthcare is the same topic. So is public education.
  - sqeaky 2y ago
    This shouldn't be downvoted. Many right-wingers will say anything is "communism" and act like that ends the discussion, because it certainly ends their involvement with the serious part of the discussion. "Communism" and "Socialism" are invoked like magical bogeyman that will destroy everything. To have any discussion on social welfare this needs to be somehow bypassed in discussions.
    - jmward01 2y ago
      I think many of the discussion threads here can be summed up as 'you can't tell me what to do' but they don't acknowledge that when people live together everything done, or not done, impacts them all. Appropriate infrastructure planning and implementation isn't socialism or communism, it is just practical. I think this thread in general has answered my initial 'why' in spades.
      - sqeaky 2y ago
        You say "discussion thread" I was thinking about "conversation with my neighbor". But yeah, even there they want to ignore their interdependence on society.
kbolino 2y ago
Unless such measures are applied globally (and practical space travel remains unobtainable), or a country completely isolates itself economically, these geographically bounded measures just displace the externalities.

jmward01 2y ago

The economy isn't a zero sum game and infrastructure projects generally pay for themselves in the long run many times over. I think we are too interested in today's budget to pay attention to historically valuable things.

sqeaky 2y ago
I would like to amend your comment: > The economy isn't a zero sum game and WELL THOUGHT OUT infrastructure projects generally pay for themselves in the long run many times over. I think we are too interested in today's budget to pay attention to historically valuable things. Consider the megaports in China's Belt and Road Initiative that will never turn a profit. Consider Neom Line, which is unlikely to ever be worth the cost. Consider. Consider the Tacoma Narrows bridge, which needed to be rebuilt because it collapsed months after construction. Infrastructure that many people need and demand in situ often produce far more wealth than free market alternatives when executed with a base level of competence. Chinese Megaports served no economic demand and are functionally modern day land grabs. Neom is zany and funded by literal royalty with no real plan. The Tecoma Narrows did insufficient testing and learned a base engineering principle. Two these failures were people on the outside pushing an idea the inside didn't want and the third failed because people doing the work didn't know something critical. Earthquake proofing the midwest is likely to be both of these failures. The people here don't want it. We wouldn't know how to do it even if we did because why the earthquakes happen in the Midwest is an open scientific question. Knowing why could well change the remediation that plate tectonic induced earthquakes and presuming it doesn't we without testing and certification we don't even know how to reliably hire earthquake proofing engineers. None of that is to say that it is impossible to do something like earthquake proof Omaha, but being possible doesn't make it a good idea. Omaha doesn't seem to want it. If it is forced on Omaha will they hire good engineers or will they hire the lowest bidder that just pencil whips everything? If they do hire good engineers will that matter if these midwest earthquakes are fundamentally different in some unknown way from CA quakes? If the remediation the good engineers implement do work then do they actually save lives and money? If there are no earthquakes, which is possible, then of course they won't. What if a 5.0 quake hits Omaha with and with and without the remediation what really is the impact? If I could spend money on laws and engineers that might have a hypothetical payoff sometime in the next 50 years and it might save tens of lives I would be a fool if I didn't do something about education, tornadoes, train derailments, or flooding with that same money that would almost certainly save lives next year.