Should I feel sorry for the folks that lost multimillion dollar homes

[candy]

in the mudslides in Laguna Beach?

Somehow it's just not affecting me the way other natural disasters do.

Am I a heartless bitch?

[mcscajun]

1. I feel bad for anyone who loses their home...

...but in this case, not for very long.

[RevCheesehead]

2. Nope, not at all.

"the wise man built his house upon the rock... the foolish man built his house upon the sand..."

Moral of the story: Don't be dumb and build where you weren't meant to live.

[Ekirh]

5. Same thing my Dad was just saying...

We don't agree often or on much. But seriously. . . at times..... to put it non so eloquently "You're just asking for it".

Heck we live ten feet from the Chesakpeake bay. . . when we suffered water damage during Isabel (Granted it was only the garage... but there was some expensive stuff in there we were unable to get out) Dad didn't grip, he pretty much believes when you live in certain places.. there are possible consequences and risks you're going to have to accept.


I realize that garage water damage is completely much less than losing you're multi-million dollar home. But I'm sorry if I'm going to build an expensive home... It's not going to be anywhere near a place the ground can give way and topple over.

[RevCheesehead]

8. I lived in California for a year.

I was amazed at how people managed to build a home which hung in mid-air, supported by wooden rafters (?) on the edge of the mountains.

I would imagine they'd cost a fortune to insure.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

9. They said on the news the houses are not covered

for landslides.

[Gelliebeans]

45. I heard that too.

I for instance can't get earthquake insurance where I live even if I had the money to pay the premiums.

[SW FL Dem]

33. What about people who build in Kansas or Texas

and whose homes are destroyed by tornadoes. Are they meant to live there? Natural disasters happen everywhere. What about midwesterners whose homes are wiped out by floods, or coastal people who lose their homes to hurricanes, or California people who happen to live near an earthquake fault. Who decides where people are "meant to live"?

[petronius]

53. It's not exactly comparable to a quake, tornado, or hurricane,

which are regional-scale and somewhat random hazards. These are specific sites with above average risk, and with these slopes it isn't a question of if it will slide, it's just when. The risk is easily avoidable by not building in an obviously hazardous location...

Every area has specific hazards, and there are appropriate methods of coexisting with most hazards - in this case people deliberately ignored the appropriate building strategy, and paid the price.

[Bouncy Ball]

56. Not comparable.

I live in the southern end of Tornado Alley, but I've never had a home of mine affected by a tornado, knock wood.

[hfojvt]

68. why are you picking on Kansas?

When Missouri has more tornadoes?
There are tornadoes from Canada to Florida, but they are not as predictable as mudslides.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

3. if they're anything like the million-dollar homes around Boston

they're probably nothing fancy. one million doesn't buy much in desirable areas. What dies it buy in Newton? A ranch? a garrison?

[Swede]

4. Of course you should feel sorry for them.

But in the big picture their loss is small,it affects only them.

[jobycom]

6. Yeah, you should feel sorry for people who are suffering

But temper that sorrow by just how much they are suffering, or should be suffering if their perspectives are inn order. An insured multi-million dollar home should be replaceable. I mourn a lot more for the people whose homes and children were destroyed by our bombs in Falluja, for instance.

[lavenderdiva]

10. On the CBS National news this evening...

they said that none of these homes was insured. Neither carriers nor the state would insure them, as there had been a history of landslides in this area. So the owners of these homes, have truly lost everything.

I do question, why one would choose to live on the side of a hill, anywhere in the Los Angeles area though. No one could pay me enough to live there. However, as these homes were all these people had, and there will be no insurance proceeds to rebuild or get on their feet again, my heart does go out to them.

[jobycom]

13. Question: They had to own the homes outright, then?

If they couldn't insure the homes, they couldn't finance them, right? Was the insurance cancelled, or did they buy the homes knowing they were uninsurable?

That's a huge loss, either way. Wow. They not only lost their homes, but a lot of their life savings.

[lavenderdiva]

18. I'm not sure about California's laws about homeowner's insurance...

I'm sure most of them held mortgages, but no homeowner's insurance. That's how the news article portrayed it. Seems like they did buy/build the homes knowing they were uninsurable. That would have been scary enough for me to run like crazy, but some people must be fearless.

In any case, they are now left holding the bag, an empty bag. They have lost what, for most people, is the single largest expenditure they will ever make. Savings will be gone, equity gone, etc. Its very sad.

[amazona]

46. oh my god I am so sorry

I did not know the homes could not be insured. Landslides cannot happen in my area, as we do not have land, only water (small not very good joke). These people have lost everything. Yes, my heart goes out to them. What an awful thing. What do you say? Home insurers pulling out of California was the first move. The second move is home insurers pulling out of Texas, Louisiana, and Florida. The priority states where home insurers want to stop insuring are California, Texas, Louisiana, Florida. But, cripes, they're coming for the rest of you next!!! A relative of mine had a fire in her condo in freakin' Connecticut and it took years for her to collect -- and she WORKED for an insurance company. This is getting scary, ya'll. How can you buy a home and work for the future if insurance companies don't, won't cover you?

Maybe I'll say more tomorrow. Right now I'm just flabbergasted. I knew the end of decent home insurance was coming -- just didn't know that for some folks in California it had already arrived. This stinks!

[SW FL Dem]

51. EXACTLY - the home insurers are moving out of CA,FL,TX

what state is next?

[lavenderdiva]

62. Yep! I live in Texas, and when I moved here from Louisiana

I called State Farm to insure my new home here. The first answer the agent gave me, was that State Farm was not taking any new clients in Texas. I protested and said that I had State Farm homeowners' insurance in Louisiana, and only then did he say that they could go ahead and offer me insurance in Texas. If I had not had the previous coverage, I would have been SOL. Apparently, here in Texas, State Farm and many other major carriers had a plethora of mold claims, and decided to NOT write any new policies after a certain point. I think that is still in effect.

[uncle ray]

72. these people gambled, and lost

so don't feel too sorry for them, no deaths, minor injuries. these people have multi milion dollar homes, uninsured! they KNEW they were uninsurable. anybody in those circumstances had DAMNED well better have their finances squared away! they may play it up for the sympathy, but most of them will likely see it as an oppertunity to build a new house. theres many more people who lose their $30,000 homes who need your sympathy.:)

[Seabiscuit]

61. I can feel sorry for anyone who loses their home, but otoh anyone ignoring

extreme hazards and building a home on a hill with a history of slides and where no one can get private or state insurance coverage is assuming the risk of losing their home every second of every day since they made the choice to do so. Maybe some people have to suffer a major loss before making the same careless mistake again. I would suspect some of these homeowners are wealthy enough they can absorb the loss and move on, hopefully to a safer location.

If someone gets behind the wheel of their expensive car drunk and speeds down the road, loses control and crashes into a tree and somehow survives, but whose car is totalled (and uninsured), I feel sorry anyone has to suffer pain, either physical or emotional, but again, the driver assumed the risk when he/she began drinking, while intending to drive afterwards, and again deciding to drive drunk.

Some lessons in responsibility are just harder to learn than others.

[RevCheesehead]

12. or the Tsunami victims. n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

20. When you're feeling compassion, do you differentiate

between the rich & poor tsunami victims?
The ones in resorts & the ones in shacks?
The ones who had to live by the sea to fish for
their living, and the ones who lived there for
pleasure?

[RevCheesehead]

21. my original point

is that these people chose to build on unstable land.

Tsunami victims didn't choose to be in the path of a natural disaster, it just happened. But building on the side of a mountain is kind of a no-brainer, isn't it?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

25. You could not have read my questions.

But I am not glad to see that you do differentiate
when it comes to compassion. You didn't learn that from Jesus.
Did you see the suffering of the people today? Their
shock and fear? Threads like this make me sad.

[RevCheesehead]

29. excuse me?

Do you know me well enough to rate my compassion, or to know my relationship with Jesus? I think not.

I was expressing an opinion about where one chooses to live. To me, this is similar to people who move to the desert, and then complain about water shortages. If you cannot see that, then I am sorry.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

30. Did you see the suffering frightened people today?

I dont care if their suffering is a result of unintelligent choices.
Much suffering in the world is the result of unintelligent choices.
I find that there is no limit to compassion and that it is free
like love.

[RevCheesehead]

34. please don't project your compassion on to me.

Hey, you feel for these people, good for you. I'm glad you have compassion for people. But please don't expect me to join you in your feelings. Can you have enough compassion to respect MY opinion? Or does everyone have to agree with you?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

35. Yes, I have enough compassion to respect your opinion.

Peace.

[serryjw]

24. How true..How true

Yes, the are multi-millionaires but I'm sure they lost valuable possessions that are replaceable. It is very sad even if they can afford to rebuild.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

7. Those are their HOMES. Suddenly a PILE OF DEBRIS.

Jesus Christ.

[Ready4Change]

14. Built on mud.

I can feel a little sorry for them. But it's limited.

It's like someone who never fills their gas tank until it's nearly empty. I can only run them to fill a gas can so many times before I've got to declare it's THEIR problem, not mine.

Build a house on mud, it's going to slide. Build a house on ground that's level with a river? Gonna flood. Right on a beach? Gonna storm away.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

16. Yeah, only have compassion for people who suffer as the result

of intelligent action.

[Zuni]

11. the fact that these people are wealthy doesn't make them evil

[tyedyeto]

15. I almost lost a home to a natural wildfire (lightning caused)

while living next to a National Forest. (It came within a few feet of my home) Is today's disaster any different than my almost a disaster since I built in an area where fires occur?

[Selatius]

17. Who was the person who decided to develop the piece of land?

Better yet, who issued the building contracts there? They should have never issued the permits to begin with. It's a safety hazard for people who move into those homes, and it's a hazard to any pour soul caught below when the land gives way.

[DBoon]

19. No

No lives were lost.

These people can easily afford the insurance to cover the loss.

They should be smart enough to know they live in a slide area (slides have occurred here in years before with the same result).

They make enough money that they can choose to live in a geologically stable area.

I would only feel sorry for the taxpayers - if they end up paying so much as one cent to these folks.

[valis]

22. They are insured, anyway... Nobody died, right?

[lavenderdiva]

64. see post #10... n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

23. I guess you compassionate progressives

did not see the human beings in the streets,
terrified, in shock, homes lost and uninsurable
against landslides, pets lost & terrified. Oh,
but theyre rich! They decided to live where they
knew the ground was unstable! Fuck them! say the
great compassionate progressives of DU. Puke.

[Lars39]

31. Empathy and compassion can easily be lost

when jealousy and pride gets in the way.

[Gelliebeans]

42. I saw them and it was sad

it was the same look of the neighborhoods in San Diego during the wildfires 2 years ago. :(

It was a natural disaster that could of been caused by the large amount of rain we received this year in southern california. :(

[amazona]

49. hey hey hey we're not all like that

I know what it's like to have God come out of the sky and smash my home. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. I hope it doesn't sound patronizing to say so, but sometimes I feel even more sorry for the rich when such things happen, because I assume they don't have the inner resouces to spring back. Which is another form of bigotry of course. The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.

To Gelliebeans-- by chance I was in San Diego during the wildfires October 2003 and I met a man who lost everything he owned "even my driver's license" in 10 minutes at Scripps Ranch. He was just as stunned and "speed-freaked" by adrenaline as I was when my house was crushed by a tropical storm or when I was in a shooting. I felt I was looking in a mirror, even though his life was nothing like mine. I knew that sensation of just having to talk, talk, talk because of the adrenaline rush of having escaped death by moments. We are all the same when tragedy crushes our homes, rich or poor alike. I'm glad you mention San Diego, I was thinking the same.

[Gelliebeans]

54. thanks for responding

because I think some people see this as "the rich deserve this" or the fact that these people lived on the side of a cliff so they are dumb for building there.

Well in our golden state here, many many people live in areas that are prone to natural disasters. It is nature. As for the insurance, as you figured out up a couple of posts, we are screwed because no one WILL insure us even if we were able to pay.

The fires in SD were 2 weeks of hell in October 2003, I spent the days at my fathers house with hoses in our hands defending his property because there weren't enough firefighters. Luckily his property was saved but his neighbors weren't so lucky.

[fortyfeetunder]

26. No I don't feel sorry

It's common sense. A clue, if a house is built on a cliff, then what are the chances it might fall off the cliff? If one does not know the stability of the hillside, best not to buy a house there. Now they really have a mudfront view, if anything.

Same goes for those waterfront houses off the ocean shore. I hope to hell those owners now understand what tsunamis can do.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

27. How about the folks in Florida with the hurricanes?

The folks in Tornado Alley?
The folks who get AIDS through not so intelligent choices & behavior?
Feel sorry for them?

[Swede]

37. Schadenfreude seems to be alive and well here.

These are human beings in a horrible situation.

[BikeWriter]

32. Whoa! Extrapolate far enough and everyone is to blame...

for any acts of nature that occurs to them!

[fortyfeetunder]

55. It's common sense!

Living in a potential danger zone has consequences and responsibilities. The McMansion owners had no less consequences or responsibilities than I did when it came to home maintenance.

[BikeWriter]

69. That does not mean compassion for them is misquided or undeserved.

[fortyfeetunder]

57. It's a question of risk acceptance

I study this in my job. Every risk has a probability and a consequence. When a person makes a contract to buy a house in a landslide zone, that person accepts the risk the house may not stay intact during a landslide while owning the property.

The risk could be mitigated by good engineering/architectural design, building in safeguards...etc.

Those people accepted the risk and they accepted the probability and its consequences. Right now their probability number is a big fat 1. and its consequences are...catastrophic...lost house.

[BikeWriter]

70. Okay, I choose to feel sorry for their losses anyway.

I've made bad decisions in my life, too.

[SW FL Dem]

28. Many of the people are elderly or working class families

The homes are their only asset and they lost everything. They didn't pay millions for their homes.

[Floogeldy]

36. YES

How would you like your home to be demolished by mother nature?

Hmmmm?

Don't hate rich people. That's a bad barometer.

[MrSlayer]

38. If they have multi-million dollar homes you can bet they have insurance.

I sort of see what you mean as I have this pre-conceived notion that rich people really don't place sentimental value on anything and everything is about the money and the glitz and the show. But I'm sure there are people there who lost treasured heirlooms and such that are irreplaceable. I feel bad but they'll be fine whereas a lot of the people who had there homes destroyed in the Tsunami for example will never recover. It's not right to measure sympathy by economic status but when it's property and no lives lost I always feel worse for the poorer person.

[lavenderdiva]

65. see post #10... n/t

[MazeRat7]

39. It was THEIR HOME...what does price have to do with it ?

Would you be sad if you lost YOUR home ? I would.

MZr7

[Crunchy Frog]

40. I have to confess to being a heartless bitch myself.

I mean, no one was killed, or even badly injured, and from what I've heard, they knew they were living on top of a potential landslide, and chose to anyway because they liked the view. It sounds like it was all wealthy people and I'm sure they all have good insurance.

I just can't relate to this in the same way that I do the tsunami.

[Kenneth ken]

41. I can't tell you what you should feel

but I doubt you're a heartless bitch.

Your question makes me think you're feeling some degree of empathy for what they have lost, so you apparently do have a heart.

As far as I know, no one died, so maybe that is tempering your feelings; property is just property after all, and not as significant as a life.

Yes, they lost their homes, and it will have an adverse effect on thier life, but they still have their lives, and so have the opportunity to overcome the loss.

:hi:

[amazona]

43. well they probably have insurance

It affects my heart because I was in a natural disaster and even if you DO have insurance, trust me, you still lose personal stuff that can't be replaced. In fact, today, I was asked for some memorabilia that I no longer have due to my natural disaster. So I don't care if you live in a tin shack or a million dollar palace, if you're in a natural disaster, I know it's a heartache. But no you're not a heartless bitch. Realistically, the very rich do not empathize with many of our tragedies. Your son arrested for drugs -- fear, trembling, not knowing if he'll be in prison for years, infected with AIDS, even killed. Their son arrested for drugs -- annoyance they gotta call their friend the governor to yell at the governor's friend the D.A. So I don't blame you for not having empathy because I know they don't have equal empathy for us.

It's just that having been through destruction of my home I can't help but feel for whoever it is. Rich or poor. No amount of insurance completely makes up for it. But you are entitled to feel what you feel. And your empathy or lack thereof doesn't affect precisely BECAUSE they are rich. If they are poor, empathy is crucial in getting disaster aid. Since they are rich, it is not necessary -- they will be compensated.

[Floogeldy]

47. They may not have had insurance covering the disaster

This is a sick thread.

[Gelliebeans]

67. You are right it is

sick. :eyes:

[JustJoe]

73. It's only about a third of the posts

that show a uh non-surplus of compassion. Just because a bunch of people get together to hate Bush doesn't mean they are on some kind of spiritual path, path of love. Empathy's hard, hurts, gets messy. Easier to divide up the world into pieces. Third here, third there, lol. If you would have them love more, then love them more.

[Ladyhawk]

71. Great post. I can't help but feel sympathy for people who have

lost a home. Like you said:

"It affects my heart because I was in a natural disaster and even if you DO have insurance, trust me, you still lose personal stuff that can't be replaced."

Some things are irreplaceable, even for rich folks.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

44. INSURANCE DOES NOT cover landslide damage.

I am not an insurance agent or a lawyer. That is what
was reported on all the local news stations here in LA.

[Gelliebeans]

48. geez I hope

I don't suffer a natural disaster and lose my home, as someone will have to scrutinize whether I am worthy of empathy.

[amazona]

52. yeah just saw that -- DAMN!

Talk about pouring salt in wounds. Jesus God, if it's $50K (my little house in Louisiana) or it's $3 million dollars in Scripps Ranch, San Diego, nothing is made better and everything is made worse if you don't have the dollars to at least keep the hotel bill paid and the groceries on the table while your home is being rebuilt.

[Rabrrrrrr]

50. Yes, but you can also relish the schadenfreude

I am!

[gardenista]

58. You have no obligation to feel sorry for anyone, but

compassion is usually bourne out of empathy. If you can imagine losing everything you own, with no insurance, even if you made a bad choice as to where you lived, you might see your way to having a thought for them.

We all bleed the same. It doesn't matter how rich or poor we are. Some of those people were probably kind and empathetic to others, some probably were not. But I know they deserve my sympathy, no matter who they are, or how much they lost. And they have it.

Just because people make poor choices, it does not mean they do not deserve our sympathy. Many on the RW argue that the homeless do not deserve our sympathy because they made poor choices and used drugs or drank alcohol until they were not able to provide housing for themselves. Or that we should turn our backs on people with AIDS because they committed a sin, in their eyes; or that unwed mothers deserve their difficulties if they have a hard time supporting their children.

Compassion cuts both ways. And there are, unfortunately, many heartless people around. It's up to you to decide who you want to be.

[bridgit]

59. ah, well, no; not if you know the area down there...

residents...they know it = may be in denial but they know it = everything is built on a tilt of some kind, poised & ready to slide

[cestpaspossible]

60. What we need is a picture of a little kid crying

to get the pity juices flowing.

[HEyHEY]

63. Not everyone with money got it on the backs of someone else

No matter what half the people here will tell you.

Just keep that in mind.

[bridgit]

66. there's that too...

:thumbsup: :hi: