Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

drmeow

(5,739 posts)
2. This highlights one of the reasons
Sun Sep 1, 2024, 10:12 AM
Sep 2024

I hate that they talk about damage in terms of cost. There's a big difference when something causes billions of dollars of damage on the coast of Malibu vs billions of dollars of damage in poor areas. They need to report damage in terms of how many homes are affected, how many people are misplaced, and how much infrastructure impacted (they can talk about infrastructure damage in terms of dollar amounts). A billion dollars of damage when the homes are all $5 million is 200 homes. When those homes are $50K that's 20,000. I give a much bigger f**k about people losing their $50K home than about someone losing a $5 million home. Its not that it is not going to hurt to lose a $5 million home but if you can afford that home in the first place you are likely to have a ton more resources than if all you can afford is a $50K home (if you can even afford that)

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»FEMA Flood Risk Index Bas...»Reply #2