Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (124660)	9/24/2000 7:41:55 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1570370

Pete The building codes in California need to be strengthened. The quality of construction would not be allowed for a detached garage here in Wisconsin (actually I have seen outhouses here built better). Many of those freeways should be rebuilt to keep the primary road at ground level where there is lot less likely to be damage. Building a double decker freeway may be less costly, but it is inherently far less safe. And California should pay for all those upgrades out of its own pocket Because of climatic differences, CA can build things to a lesser standard when it comes to temperature. However when it comes to earthquake specifications, CA is the most advanced state in the union. Unfortunately we are still learning as to what are the best things to do when constructing bldgs. to mitigate the impact of an earthquake. Consequently buildings fell in the Northridge quake that most engineers thought would withstand an 6.8 earthquake. They learned that soft second stories are death traps, that it makes a difference how deep the location of the quake is.....a 6.8 quake 1 mile below the surface is a lot different than a 6.8 5 miles below..apparently Richter did not take that into consideration; that even one story bldgs need sound walls. There were homes that looked fine but when you opened the walls the 2 X 4's were splintered and the house was a teardown. I probably agree with you that no one should have been allowed to live in CA. However how are they any different than the people who live in a flood plain and after a major flood go back and build on the same spot, or the people who live in Tornado Alley, or the people who insist on building homes on the NC, SC and FLA coastlines? I am afraid we would all end up living in WI. I am sure your governor would be really happy about that one. <g> ted