This is because,most of the Ministers & Secretaries of Govt. have not actually faced a natural disaster by them selves.They might have seen only in videos,& hearsay,& as disasters happpen at any time - all time preparedness is just out of the question.
Such a situation is mostly found in third world countries.
When Tsunami from Indonesia quake at Acheache had taken place & when Sri Lankan President was to be warned about impending high waves on its East coast,he was out of the country & then the Next important statesman was informed.He thought that some dignitary from Indonesia was comming to SriLanka for some emergency talks.So their Govt. put up a banner at the Colombo Airport saying "Welcome Mr.Tsunami from Indonesia,the SriLankan Govt. heartly welcomes him".After the disaster had taken place did they know what a Tsunami is!
This is the state of preparedness.
As a species we have a poor record for acting sensibly as opposed to reacting to somewhat predictable events. We're not hardwired for it, & learning how to be would be too disruptive to our societal norms for those who benefit from them to probably ever happen. I think it would be easier to move people out of the predicted paths of events rather than rip up roads or mountaintops, but then you'd upset the real estate people who in part depend on profiting from less than optimal placement of development, as in many places that's all that's left.
Generally we have to be forced into action though, and the excuse is always money & it's verboten to look at the economic model & suggest alterations to it that accommodate the things that happen in the world which would bring us back to why we're hardwired to generally empty some-one else's slush funds.
Are you kidding? In the US they won't even do upkeep to roads through forests which are a great benefit to fighting forest fires.
In Australia, for example, a couple of years back, the powers that be decided to save water in dams. Well, they saved it a bit too much and when the dam became overloaded it broke, resulting in deaths and destruction.
The green movement has many times caused the deaths of fire fighters by their insanity. These are usually nit wits who are out for taxing and control rather than saving the world, and their actions many times prove it.
Welcome to planet earth.
So far, hydro-meteorological disasters (monsoons, cyclones, droughts, tsunamis, floods etc.) have increased rapidly over the past 25 years, although natural geologic disasters (volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, landslides, avalanches etc.) have stayed pretty steady over the years.
But going back to hydro-meteorological disasters, are governments actually going to take action to this? Action to the fact that in 100 or so years, natural disasters may become commin for the average person to be in.
For instance;
Removing some of the rocky mountains to balance air movements and reduce so much twisters,
Or planting trees deserts, as trees actually make there own environment once planted, will balance take major effect on global warming, which will reduce cyclones and droughts, and off topic, make more room for people to prevent overpopulation.
But anyway, ive drifted of track, are governments actually taking money costing affects to reduce natuarul disasters?
P.S im in Australia right now, and ex-tropical cyclone hitting us, flooding coming, bushfires surrounding us, IM sick of it
