We’re basically signing up for more people dying or more regularly having their life savings burned down pretty regularly if we don’t get smart about building and re-building in woodland-urban interface areas.https://apnews.com/b17b5c9200a64466b49f3f605f9202fe …
-
-
Combined with this from the other day, I’m like, uh.... so we’re gonna let PG&E off the hook and let Californians continue building out in the fire zones? Coo coo.https://twitter.com/nytimesbusiness/status/1117599699295457280?s=21 …
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think he wants to avoid the specter of triggering inverse condemnation, and blowing the state's budget on the richest 1% who can afford to live there.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The non draconian solution is simple : stop subsiding fire and flood insurance in those areas prone to disastrous events. Also - PG+E isn't solely (or mostly) to blame for fires - CA and Fed forestry management is the major factor.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.