• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

This Is Why Proper Regulation Is Imposed On Buildings On The West Coast

I would never live inland in CA, OR or WA for the same reasons, I suspect, that most up-and-coming companies locate nearer the coast. The weather, the educational level of the population, that opportunities for entertainment, touring, etc. It's blazing hot in the interior (why I would never live again in the Midwest and, especially, in the South) which makes being outdoors half of the year very unpleasant. Also, around Seattle, up and down Puget Sound, there are very few places left to build. There are the Sound to the West, and mountains to the East. Unlike Dallas, which is flat and unoccupied the farther out you go. Our topography causes problems. But those views!!! And hiking opportunities!!! And boating opportunities!!! And, eating fresh fish and shelllfish and... and... and...

You are like me and all my friends who were born and raised here.

We could never live inland. I've talked about it with my friends. None of us would ever move inland.

We can visit but the thought of living away from the water is unacceptable.

Not just for the reasons you listed. The ones you listed are a part of it but, I know this is going to sound weird, it just doesn't feel right being away from the water for a long period of time.
 
Uh, really?
"Jackson's already-frail water system suffered a dayslong outage over the summer, in a crisis that sparked national outrage and called attention to the decades of water struggles in the city of 150,000 residents, nearly 83% of them Black."
"“Our water system continues to pose challenges. With significant deferred maintenance, we experienced a pump failure at one of our two Stonebridge Wells, and are currently operating at significantly reduced capacity,” Director Leach explained. “Increased water conservation for the next two weeks will help us navigate this challenge.”

One is poor and black in MS. The other is rich and white in CA. What is the common interest?
If you think hard, maybe REAL hard, then you would be laughing at that ridiculous reach. How do you think the cities reach a tax rate? WAG? Or do you think they would calculate what the average cots for 'services' are that they implement?
No idea why you think that article addresses what I said or why that article would be at all relevant.

Pump failure, or simply a lack of water is fairly commonplace.
 
They themselves don't live in in a major earthquake area with major faults in the earth. So they don't need regulations to build buildings that withstand major earthquakes.
You are correct. However, Florida, which has itself in Mother Nature's crosshairs during the summer and early fall months, has building regs to adapt to hurricanes.
 
You are like me and all my friends who were born and raised here.

We could never live inland. I've talked about it with my friends. None of us would ever move inland.

We can visit but the thought of living away from the water is unacceptable.

Not just for the reasons you listed. The ones you listed are a part of it but, I know this is going to sound weird, it just doesn't feel right being away from the water for a long period of time.
Have you ever pondered the idea that you could possibly BE aquaman?
 
If you think hard, maybe REAL hard, then you would be laughing at that ridiculous reach. How do you think the cities reach a tax rate? WAG? Or do you think they would calculate what the average cots for 'services' are that they implement?
No idea why you think that article addresses what I said or why that article would be at all relevant.
These are two different cities in two different states with two different populations. Yet they both have expenses associated with their water systems that are not paid for by their tax revenues.

Ergo, your claim that these services are paid for by the taxes paid by the users and by earlier payments from developers is...demonstrably false.
 
Uh, really?
"Jackson's already-frail water system suffered a dayslong outage over the summer, in a crisis that sparked national outrage and called attention to the decades of water struggles in the city of 150,000 residents, nearly 83% of them Black."
"“Our water system continues to pose challenges. With significant deferred maintenance, we experienced a pump failure at one of our two Stonebridge Wells, and are currently operating at significantly reduced capacity,” Director Leach explained. “Increased water conservation for the next two weeks will help us navigate this challenge.”

One is poor and black in MS. The other is rich and white in CA. What is the common interest?
Only in the California city is the option of the overwhelming majority to relocate temporarily or permanently economically feasible.
Jackson's present state is owing to white flight to suburbs unaffordable, inhospitable to, and red lined for blacks.
 
These are two different cities in two different states with two different populations. Yet they both have expenses associated with their water systems that are not paid for by their tax revenues.
Does it say that? Seriously? It lends itself to asking whether or not they taxed enough for a major re-haul, or pay for a new pump, which points to bad risk assessment/accounting, not whether it paid for the service to residents.
Ergo, your claim that these services are paid for by the taxes paid by the users and by earlier payments from developers is...demonstrably false.
I can't even remotely see how you'd, illogically, come to that conclusion.

Let's look at the other 836,234 cities to make double sure ?
 
The republicans say that building in the three west coast states is too expensive and way too much regulation.

They themselves don't live in in a major earthquake area with major faults in the earth. So they don't need regulations to build buildings that withstand major earthquakes.

We have them here and yes, they cause damage but not like we are seeing in Turkey and Syria. Buildings collapsing people dead. People trapped in the wreckage. Devastation on a level of total destruction. And a lot of those buildings weren't very tall.

I wish that republicans would wake up and realize that the regulations and laws are for a very good reason.






So which West Coast states DON'T have strong requirements for building in an earthquake zone? Also, to the best of my knowledge all three west coast states are Democrat controlled.
 
You are correct. However, Florida, which has itself in Mother Nature's crosshairs during the summer and early fall months, has building regs to adapt to hurricanes.

Legislation​

The Florida legislature passed condo reform legislation in a May 2022 special session addressing issues highlighted in the aftermath of the Surfside collapse. The bill creates a state-wide inspection program for condo buildings taller than three stories. Starting in 2025, the buildings will go through a "milestone inspection" certification process when reaching 30 years of age, or 25 years if the building is located within three miles of the coast, and will be inspected again every 10 years afterward. The inspection records must be posted online and shared with tenants, and condo associations will no longer be able to waive the requirement that they keep a reserve fund large enough to maintain the structural integrity of the building.[197][198]
 

Legislation​

The Florida legislature passed condo reform legislation in a May 2022 special session addressing issues highlighted in the aftermath of the Surfside collapse. The bill creates a state-wide inspection program for condo buildings taller than three stories. Starting in 2025, the buildings will go through a "milestone inspection" certification process when reaching 30 years of age, or 25 years if the building is located within three miles of the coast, and will be inspected again every 10 years afterward. The inspection records must be posted online and shared with tenants, and condo associations will no longer be able to waive the requirement that they keep a reserve fund large enough to maintain the structural integrity of the building.[197][198]
The hurricane building guidelines are voluntary. I do admit that (i just found it in research), but i'm sure if you want better home insurance rates...
 
<<< truncated >>>

"In most cases, it will be more like to come across a studio apartment with floor space less than 19.7 sqm (212 sqft) which is much lower than half of the average size. There are about 1.4 million condos of this size, accounting for 21% of Tokyo’s 6.8 million households..."
I've been around East Asia for many decades, and here in Japan for most of those decades. Apartments I have seen throughout the years have frequently been very small by the standards I remember from when I was younger and in the U.S. and the detached homes are also smaller with little land area around them.

We had a housing area near the old Tachikawa Air Base (now Japanese, but owned by whom nobody can be sure) --- anyway, the old U.S. housing area was open to public use way back when and the Japanese that would visit one of those homes were always amazed at the size of the homes and the front yard being there. A real front yard. Thing was that most of the housing was rented out to retired U.S. military folks and I was never quite sure how they got that deal so neatly arranged. It's been so many years since I have been near that place, but I just didn't remember too many Japanese families renting there. But the point is the size of those places used to really surprise the average Japanese gal/guy.

But a key point is that a lawn/yard or close to that is really not so common when compared to what I remember in the states. And, yes, most average apartment type residences are way smaller than most western folks would be comfortable in. Even when you get away from the high density areas the apartment style residences remain small because of the money, not because there is no room to build larger types.

I feel sort of lucky my daughter was able to be raised in a home with a reasonable yard, except the work to keep the trees trimmed didn't seem to be so pleasant for her. And, of course, the trees bring in all sorts of neat insects, some not so friendly. But it must be better to grow up in a place like that, than a small apartment type place.
 
Does it say that? Seriously? It lends itself to asking whether or not they taxed enough for a major re-haul, or pay for a new pump, which points to bad risk assessment/accounting, not whether it paid for the service to residents.

I can't even remotely see how you'd, illogically, come to that conclusion.

Let's look at the other 836,234 cities to make double sure ?
How about you provide examples of two cities running surpluses because of their taxes first?
 
It's not just Republicans that say that. Everyone can see that it's true.

Uhh no. There *is* way too much regulation in West Coast states, which makes housing super-expensive. And it has nothing to do with earthquake safety standards, which I don't think anyone is calling to repeal. The overregulation is all about the ridiculous zoning boards, NIMBYism, drawn-out environmental impact studies for even the simplest new buildings, and cities basically making it impossible to build anything.

It's high population density along the coast and NIMBYism.
 
There are many things over which you have no control.

And many of them are totally stupid, like using the name Karen that way.

Even if I can't control what people say, I will attack them for doing that every single time because it is directly offensive to everyone named Karen.
 
And many of them are stupid, like using the name Karen that way.
No one is going to stop just because you don't like it. I would recommend not being upset about what anonymous people do on the internet.
 
But Washington, Oregon, California, and Hawaii have almost always been blue states

I'd like that to be the case, but not so much. California gave the country (one of the best Republicans) Earl Warren, and also Nixon and Reagan, the two who ended the FDR era and put the country on the road for oligarchy. We had a long string of Republican governors, including this century recalling a fine two term Democratic governor and replacing him with Schwarzeneggar to let Enron off the hook for their crimes. Now it's better.

Unfortunately, Californians have a history of getting 'tricked' by Republican causes, though that's gotten somewhat better.

For a few examples, Republican got through a bill to radically slash commercial property taxes, by including residential property taxes. While some residential reform was needed, now two next door neighbors might pay 10 times different taxes for the same type of property, and commercial real estate can see almost no increase indefinitely. It gutted the state revenue, causing all kinds of problems including school budgets.

Our ballot process has been used by wealthy and Republican interests, to end affirmative action in areas, to ban gay marriage, to exempt ride-sharing companies from a law helping workers, the last to with money reversing early polling. We let Republicans end Gerrymandering in the state by Democrats, giving Republicans a huge national win.

In fact, an LA Times headline two days ago is, "Corporations turn to ballot to combat California's Progressive agenda, raising alarms". For example, we passed a law limiting buffer zones around oil wells near homes, big oil has a ballot initiative to overturn it. Republicans also have an initiative to require 2/3 votes for any tax increase, killing them if they have even 1/3 of the vote.
 
No one is going to stop just because you don't like it. I would recommend not being upset about what anonymous people do on the internet.

Nobody can stop me from being upset about this one.
 
You are correct. However, Florida, which has itself in Mother Nature's crosshairs during the summer and early fall months, has building regs to adapt to hurricanes.


It's strange that so much of Florida keeps getting flattened by hurricanes. Their building regs obviously don't require that buildings withstand hurricanes. At least not homes.

Where are the proper sea walls to prevent flooding from the ocean? Where are the proper sewage systems to handle a lot of water?





They get flattened so much that most major insurance companies are no longer selling policies in Florida. It's not easy to get home insurance there and what people can get is very expensive.

Insurance companies aren't leaving the west coast because of earthquakes. In fact, they aren't leaving for any reason that I know of. Insurance for homes is cheap here.
 
In fairness to Turkey and Syria - there are a lot of buildings on the West Coast that would not survive an earthquake of this magnitude. In fact, the building codes in California don’t account for earthquakes of this magnitude.

Show your work.
 
You miss my point on turnover. Family buys big house. Kids grow up and leave. 2 people live in a 4 bdrm home and use 1 bdrm. That is available housing that is not available to anyone else.

Are you suggesting my wife and I open our home for strangers to rent out bedrooms?
I ask because as we are now empty nesters, that describes us 100%. We HAVE a four bedroom home (actually THREE if you don't count the miniscule "baby bedroom" that I used to use as a studio. Since my daughter moved to Portland I first moved our son into HER old BR because it has its own bathroom and now he's gone so we have an extra two bedrooms, one tiny and one large with a bathroom and I use Daryl's old room as my studio now.

edit bay Sept 2021a.webp
 
Nobody can stop me from being upset about this one.

My wife is named Karen and I occasionally snort with indignation and suggest we call them "Ivankas" instead but we're nowhere near as deadly serious as you are.
Karen just rolls her eyes.

Karen Nancie wine time3.webp
 
Back
Top Bottom