"[Hurricane Michael] is like a massive tornado"
- Thread starter EweSeaEff
- Start date
He's the one that said the idiotic comment; so, yeah, it's definitely his fault.
Wasn't it the noaa guy that said it? I think the 175 mph gusts was the point it is massive.
He said that the winds are comparable to an F3. Trump - as is his SOP - later manipulated that comment and said the hurricane is like a massive tornado. Two completely different things.
Absolutely insane summer we've had. Multiple Cat 5 equivalent Super Typhoons in the West Pac, Florence and now this monster Michael out of nowhere on the east, and even a Hurricane in the Med. This is nuts.
Funny thing is I heard at least 3 weather folks make the exact same statement during the storm .
and it was Republican Governor Jeb that put in those regulations, some skeletor looking man rolled it back so construction can inflate the economic numbers
I watched a lot of coverage across multiple networks and didn't see that; but, if so, then send me the video/audio link and I'll call out their ignorant asses too!
Just so we're clear:
Mexico City beach was incorporated in 1967. In 1990, it had just 400 people less than it did when Michael hit, meaning that the city had pretty much been built up to where it was by then. There was no massive housing or construction boom in the last 8 years.
So if I believe your comment then, I am to believe that a Governor who was elected in 2008 is responsible for the way these homes were built between the periods of 1967-1990?
Rick Scott must be magical. He can travel time to change the way homes and buildings were built 30-40 years ago!
I don’t care enough to even consider it . Was just making an observation and nothing more
And my point was not even related to defending Trump . But the same people with tds can’t get him out of their heads
I found it interesting that the NY Times actually included this line about the impact of the cost of regulation: "In the coastal Panhandle counties affected by Michael, the requirement is lower, for 120 to 150 miles an hour, and the rules for certain kinds of reinforcement have applied to houses built more than a mile from shore only since 2007. Many of the residences and businesses rubbed out by Michael in Mexico Beach were far older; rebuilding them to conform to the new code will be expensive, and could price out some of the working-class people who historically have flocked to Mexico Beach."
It's not the cost to contractors that is the issue; it's the cost to the consumer. The contractors will pass the cost off to their customers. However, you can't just increase regulations beyond what the market will bear. You have to find the balance point. I'd also have to think that the "evil" insurance companies are going to be requiring more hurricane prevention from now on and probably lobbying the state for your increase in regulations.
They'll find sympathizers too, from many of the same people that rail against the insurance industry. Many activists, and virtue signalers on this board, couldn't give a rat's ass about anything other than whatever issue they're looking directly at. Inevitably, they are the loudest screamers too. Because they ignore or don't understand complex systems they can be steadfast in their causes. It's all with good intention, but you know what they say about good intentions.
This was my point above. Most of Mexico City Beach had already been built in the decades prior and yet we have a person here trying to assert that Rick Scott is responsible for the widespread damage, due to regulation changes that had nothing to do with the existing structures.
big picture for the entire State of Florida it is still stupid to overturn. The next 'big one' could eventually turn towards Tampa Bay or another highly populated area. If you want to live/build right on the coast pay up.
You see constant examples of this in earthquake zones around the World when comparing 3rd World Nations that go cheap on building codes.
I personally think if you live near the coast, you do so at your own risk, strong building codes or not. Taxes or other public fees should not be used towards erosion control to save homes near the beach nor should it be used subsidize those who choose to live there.
That’s all nice and dandy but you directly asserted above that Mexico City being wiped out was the fault of Rick Scott (or, skeleton as you insulted him). Which is 100% false.
Your points would be better received if not dripping in partisan ooze
that’s all you do. If it was partisan ooze I wouldn’t have admitted that a Republican Governor put in the regulation. So like always you are looking to pick an e fight that isn’t there
Oh spare me. You threw that out there just to make your false attack on Scott, the relevant politician in 2018, stick a little better. We aren’t dumb.
Kudos for the “skeletor” reference. Nothing partisan there
Because nobody sees the value in building houses that will stay upright without regulations?
Or maybe people value the freedom to gamble a little bit and build a less expensive house that won’t do well in a once in a century storm.
The other issue is how do you apply all these regulations?
Does a house in Ocala need to be kept up to the same regulations as a house in Jacksonville Beach?
