Climate change is mostly irrelevant to the fires here. These fires were preventable had the city and state administration competent.

There would've been complaints if the reservoir was kept filled with a waiver, preventing it from use as drinking water due to the contamination from a damaged cover, and no fire occurred.

When climate change events occur, people will say we could've done more (while there is no evidence today there is willingness to pay these readiness and mitigation costs). When they don't happen, people will complain we're wasting money. The only way to win is to manage your own climate and economic risk at the individual level (in the short term). Maybe people improve, allowing for institutions to improve, but probably not. There is no appetite for the will, spending, and economic drag that will be required to fix this. The accumulated off balance sheet debt (the costs to mitigate climate change) has accelerated beyond the light cone of economic potential (structural demographic decline, labor costs increasing as labor forces decline, future debt obligations, etc).

Is the world becoming uninsurable? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42732728 - Jan 2025

Dependency and depopulation? Confronting the consequences of a new demographic reality - https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/our-research/dependency-and-dep...

Climate crisis costs the world 12% in GDP for every 1°C temperature rise - https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/06/nature-climate-news-...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

This is simply not true. The risk of extreme events is up. One source (there are many): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06444-3