When and WHERE will it pop up next? Guesstimates

[kalakoa]

In the case of ERZ, not so many people, very small economic contribution and a very well-identified and bounded hazard zone that can be easily avoided.

Except: the emergency pays better than agriculture or property taxes, and with money that is easily controlled so it doesn't accidentally create political power outside the system.

Example: despite the "well-identified, easily avoided" hazard zone ... CD insists that the entire area is too dangerous for people to be allowed to return to their homes.

County "lost" $5M in property tax revenue ... but State has already paid out $12M in disaster funds. Perverse incentives? Standard operating procedure.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by benny

Yes, if you live anywhere there could be a hurricane, tornado, derecho, earthquake, lava flow, flood, tsunami, landslide, riot, wildland fire, sinkhole, lahar, pyroclastic surge, dust storm, plague of locusts, infectious pandemic, or terrorist attack, you should get out now, and the government should take your land in the interest of public safety.

I have no idea where you're all going to go.

Benny

---

The specific details of the threat, and who and what is threatened, and how easy it is to move the later all enter into the assessment, something you completely failed to address

Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Of course, if it is a large population covering a large area, making a sustained considerable economic contribution or the hazard is large-scale and difficult to assess

The larger the population, infrastructure, and business presence, the greater the loss and emergency government assistance required after a disaster. If your point is to minimize government intervention, a “large population covering a large area” would require the greatest government assistance. By that standard, Puna is a bargain compared to New Orleans and Houston, so why should we move out if they don’t?

As far as a case by case assessment, that would be subjectively determined by those who make the assessment. Puna has too often received the short end of the stick, so I don’t have much faith in the outcome of a case by case basis.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

[ElysianWort]

Originally posted by ElysianWort

So if it is the Southwest, is that more the Kau side?


Do you live on the island?

Cheers,
Kirt

Cannot hear tone or inflection but that sounds a tad bit condescending there Kirt.
Cheers.
(hmm we see who the instigators are)

Yes I do live on the island but am not sure which fissure on Mauna loa goes what direction. I'm glad it's so obvious to you.

I was actually asking midnightrambler but thanks for your reply.

[]

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kalakoa

In the case of ERZ, not so many people, very small economic contribution and a very well-identified and bounded hazard zone that can be easily avoided.

Except: the emergency pays better than agriculture or property taxes, and with money that is easily controlled so it doesn't accidentally create political power outside the system.

Example: despite the "well-identified, easily avoided" hazard zone ... CD insists that the entire area is too dangerous for people to be allowed to return to their homes.

County "lost" $5M in property tax revenue ... but State has already paid out $12M in disaster funds. Perverse incentives? Standard operating procedure.

---

I agree that the entire ERZ is way too dangerous. Other areas, such as Hilo, West Rift, probably fall below the "thresh hold", but I can't say for certain - however, others probably could, such as CD in consultation with HVO or other experts. The ERZ, however, is obviously too "hot" to occupy on such a scale. If you are personally involved, it might be hard to see, but for those who are assessing the situation from an independe vantage point it is beyond obvious.

Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge

Of course, if it is a large population covering a large area, making a sustained considerable economic contribution or the hazard is large-scale and difficult to assess

The larger the population, infrastructure, and business presence, the greater the loss and emergency government assistance required after a disaster. If your point is to minimize government intervention, a “large population covering a large area” would require the greatest government assistance. By that standard, Puna is a bargain compared to New Orleans and Houston, so why should we move out if they don’t?

As far as a case by case assessment, that would be subjectively determined by those who make the assessment. Puna has too often received the short end of the stick, so I don’t have much faith in the outcome of a case by case basis.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

---

With such a large population you are almost as likely to move them into the path of an ill-defined hazard (such as hurricanes or an earthquake that might hit anywhere along a fault line running hundreds of miles), than to move them from its path. Furthermore, in addition to people and housing, there would probably be a huge installed base of economic infrastructure.

Obviously, each possible locale needs an independent assessment based on all of these factors, as well as, potentially, others, but those are not "Puna" and I don't want to drift off-topic or locale. I am, after all, a slow learner, but not completely brain-dead.

Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge

Of course, if it is a large population covering a large area, making a sustained considerable economic contribution or the hazard is large-scale and difficult to assess

The larger the population, infrastructure, and business presence, the greater the loss and emergency government assistance required after a disaster. If your point is to minimize government intervention, a “large population covering a large area” would require the greatest government assistance. By that standard, Puna is a bargain compared to New Orleans and Houston, so why should we move out if they don’t?

As far as a case by case assessment, that would be subjectively determined by those who make the assessment. Puna has too often received the short end of the stick, so I don’t have much faith in the outcome of a case by case basis.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

---

Those who shop in the Bargain Basement aren't likely to get the best in the way of Customer Service.

Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

for those who are assessing the situation from an independe vantage point it is beyond obvious.

Assessing the Puna lava flow vs California fires from my independent vantage point neither in the LRZ or Fresno, lower Puna looks a lot less dangerous (no one died) and a whole lot less expensive in Federal dollars.

I agree with benny:
I have no idea where you're all going to go.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge

for those who are assessing the situation from an independe vantage point it is beyond obvious.

Assessing the Puna lava flow vs California fires from my independent vantage point neither in the LRZ or Fresno, lower Puna looks a lot less dangerous (no one died) and a whole lot less expensive in Federal dollars.

I agree with benny:
I have no idea where you're all going to go.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

---

I don't think they are going anywhere. The threat is too diffuse, unlike the ERZ.

Speaking Truth to Lies / Facts to Ignorance

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

unlike the ERZ.

OK.
Got it.

Puna is the most dangerous location anywhere in the 50 states of America, probably on Earth. And perhaps not even limited to our solar system or galaxy. We'll have to wait for that assessment by Captain Kirk when his 5 year mission is underway sometime in the future, analyzing factors on a planet by planet basis, determining whether the positive outweighs the negative, and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

No other speck of rock harbors potential disaster as Puna, at such regular and frequent intervals, so systematic you could almost set your watch by them, cataclysms and devastation of Biblical proportions almost (but not quite) guaranteed, on a basis entirely unlike any tinder dry forest, low lying flood plain or coastal area now subjected to rising sea levels - -

Case closed.
We're dumber than a ROD ohia stump.
Puna & Puna-er.

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18