• GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish
    10·
    5 hours ago

    more firefighters means more area of coverage.

    it’s not their fault, the opposite actually.

    it’s the ineptitude of the administration that failed to account for real risks to the lives and success of the citizens they were elected to protect.

    they failed at their duty to identify an annually occurring symptom of a globally changing environment as high risk and instead opted to support a violent regime that continues to attack the citizens they, again, we’re elected to protect.

    • lumpybag@reddthat.comEnglish
      2·
      4 hours ago

      Lmao so much nonsense over $17 mil. Isn’t the LAFDs budget close to $1,000,000,000? California alone has more invested in forest fire firefighting than most countries. Here is some numbers provided by the state, https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/01/08/california-forest-management-hotter-drier-climate/

      Based on what I’m reading another $1.5 billion has been added to the firefighting budget.

      A mayors office is not suited to perform firefighting. They play a very small role. Nonsense.

    • njm1314@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      5 hours ago

      So exactly what you’re saying then. There’s a specific number of firefighters if employed this fire would not have happened. What’s that number? How would they have specifically stop this fire? The current firefighters failed because there wasn’t enough of them? Right? That’s what you’re getting it.