<<I agree Christine, and the same should apply to anyone who is dumb enough to build a house in the San Francisco area knowing full well it could be destroyed at any moment by an earthquake. They should get NO help from the federal government to rebuild. If their houses fall down let them live in caves. I'm sure you agree.>>
Well, in a way I do agree. I don't believe the government should be responsible for all the financial cost of earthquakes. I believe that earthquake insurance for homeowners should be readily available, however. In San Francisco we have tightened our building codes immensely since the 1989 Loma Prieta quake. Our water heater had to be replaced a few months ago. The replacement heater cost $285, but the entire cost was $1200 for the platform that it is required to be built upon, the way it is wrapped and stabilized, etc. so that it won't start a fire in an earthquake (this is how most people die in San Francisco earthquakes).
Earthquakes are not exactly the same risk as building waterfront properties in hurricane zones, however, since earthquakes happen much less frequently, and are somewhat unpredictable, unlike repeated hurricane damage. For example, the Seattle area is due for a huge earthquake, but when I lived up there their schools were not even reinforced, and building codes were quite lax. This may be because when most things were built no one was really aware of how serious an earthquake might come. Should everyone leave the Seattle area now? |
