Oct. 21, 1868. Hayward

March 26, 1872. Lone Pine

April 18, 1906. San Francisco

June 29, 1925. Santa Barbara

March 10, 1933. Long Beach

July 21, 1952. Kern County/Tehachapi

March 22, 1957. San Francisco and Daly City

March 27, 1964. Crescent City

Feb. 9, 1971 San Fernando

Oct. 1, 1987 Whittier

Oct. 18, 1989 Loma Prieta

April 25, 1992 Petrolia

June 28, 1992 Landers

Jan. 17, 1994 Northridge

Dec. 22, 2003 San Simeon

Aug. 24, 2014 Napa

It seems that large parts of California are subject to ground shaking that is destructive occurring two or more times per decade with some variability.

Is it really time to take away their insurance and disaster aid?

California is the most populous and economically significant state in the United States, which alone could stand to be the 5th largest economy in the world. California subsidizes other states, including those much much more prone to flooding, while the reverse isn't true in regards to earthquake damage.

A lot of federal disaster aid is just Californian's own money being used to help them when needed. This is true for other states like NY.

Lastly, California does indeed offer a very high deductible form of earthquake insurance, and it isn't federally subsidized like FEMA is.

That's not like Florida. If you said

1906 San Francisco

1911 San Francisco

1913 San Francisco

1922 San Francisco

1928 San Francisco

... then you 're in the neighborhood of what parts of Florida have been getting.

It's not that the whole state keeps getting hit by hurricanes. It's that individual locations have been hit multiple times in a decade. So no, California is not comparable.