Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I'd say "look, there's clearly only one wolf whose lung capacity is presumably limited. It's probably cheaper in the long run to keep building houses out of sticks, especially in non-wolf-threatened areas. Also shooting the wolf would be cheaper than building every pig a wolf-proof house"
There's almost certainly a few areas in the US where building much heavier/different structures makes economic sense due to fires, floods, or hurricanes, but it's so expensive that building cheaper elsewhere probably makes more sense unless you already have far more money than sense. (Especially in flood zones)
I hate to sound like an urbanist, but I'm looking at The Summit housing development near the fire, and if people want to build in the forested hills and grasslands outside of LA and SF, they can probably bear the cost of occasionally rebuilding their $6M mansions. Them choosing to build in such a risky location shouldn't affect the viability of those (horrible but cost-effective) 4-over-1 apartment complexes in denser areas.
Personally I'm well aware my tinder shitbox inna woods would be a lost cause if there was ever a wildfire here, and budget for it accordingly. But it hasn't happened yet, and I could build 3 or 4 of these places before the breakeven point. It's the price I pay for not having to walk on nothing but concrete, which I'm convinced sucks the soul from my body.
More options
Context Copy link