There are plenty of places to go.
For some reason we seem to love to build massive cities on disaster areas. I'm looking at you SF, LA and NYC.
But hey fuck it, lets just continue being bad at statistics and assume that because a natural disaster happened recently it won't happen again for a long time (the idea of a "500 year" storm is insane).
[1]https://www.cbsnews.com/media/top-10-safest-us-cities-from-n...
[1]http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/11/us/cascadia-subduction-zone-ea...
You can't just name three places in a very large country and then say 'etc'.
There are plenty of places with much lower risks of natural disasters. That's a big part of the reason my family lives in central New York.
Probably just the tip of the iceberg in a state that sees a lot of annual rainfall.
I live in the hills southeast of Syracuse.
Snow? A minor inconvenience, at worst. It's a frequent enough occurrence that municipalities are we set up to deal with it. If you don't have snow tires, there will be maybe 24-48 hours per year that you won't want to go driving (with snow tires, that timeframe is an order of magnitude less).
There were at least four times in the twenty years that I lived in upstate NY that snowstorms caused power outages and impassable roads at the same time.
You can't just name one place as safe from natural disasters and then explain that the two natural disasters that they get there don't count.
We can actually build structures that can withstand [the most common] tornadoes, without adding too much to the cost of construction. Basically, monolithic concrete shell structures over inflatable forms are effectively "tornado proof", without additional engineering.
The nasty natural disasters in the Midwest are not just blizzards, but freezing rain storms. A coating of ice an inch thick on everything is guaranteed to take down trees and power lines, and make all roads completely impassable. You get up to a week without civilization. For example, if your furnace catches fire, you can call 911, and later find out that the first fire truck they sent out slid off the road into a ditch on the way to your house, and the guys that finally showed up two hours later were the second truck, sent over from the next township (true story). On the Great Plains, it's drought and brushfires. You get to spend a season watching everything turn brown, and then your town burns because some jackoff threw a cigarette butt out of his window on the highway, or because lightning struck the wrong spot.
Thanks to modern meteorology, tornadoes are just much less a threat than they used to be. They might pick off a person here or there every season, but when they do, there will always be neighbors around ready to help. They just don't wipe out an entire city, leaving everyone essentially on their own, because they are all (sometimes literally) in exactly the same boat.
And that's exactly why I am comfortable living in an area where the major natural disaster threats are tornadoes and flash floods.
AndrewKemendo says: "People's aversion to moving, especially after a major disaster, boggles my mind."
But where do you go to be safe from disasters?
California - earthquakes, mudslides, wildfires, torrential rains, rip currents, and even volcanoes
Gulf Coast - hurricanes
Midwest - tornadoes
etc.
Slate Magazine set out to find where you could live free of potential disasters. See:
"Where To Hide From Mother Nature"
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_gist/200...
Their conclusion:
"Slate's "America's Best Place to Avoid Death Due to Natural Disaster": the area in and around Storrs, Conn., home to the University of Connecticut..."
Read the article to see if you're ready to make the move.