The $100 Billion Earthquake

"Holy shit. The enormity of the risk in the Bay Area hadn't really hit me until reading that scenario in the Chronicle. And that's coming from someone who studies earthquakes and seismology daily...I think I'm officially over my instinct as an earth scientist (and recent New Jersey transplant) to think it's really cool to live in an active earthquake region. 'Create earthquake preparedness kit' has just moved up from its long lingering position at the bottom of my to do list."

That's me, in a comment on Kevin Vranes' blog. The article that prompted my realization is here. It's a narrative of what will happen in the Bay Area when the next 1906-size earthquake occurs. Read it.

Awesome USGS simulation of the 1906 earthquake here.

Report on the ~$100 billion damage estimate for a repeat of 1906 event here (pdf). Note, this is likely a serious underestimate of the actual damage when "The Big One" happens. Key quote:

"Despite improvements in building codes and construction practices, the growth of the region over the past hundred years causes the range of estimated fatalities, approximately 800 to 3,400 depending on time of day and other variables, to be comparable to what it was in 1906. The forecast property loss to buildings for a repeat of the 1906 earthquake is in the range of approximately $90 to $120 billion; 7,000 to 10,000 commercial buildings in the region are estimated to be closed due to serious damage; and about 160,000 to 250,000 households calculated to be displaced from damaged residences. Losses due to fire following earthquake, as well as losses to utility and transportation systems, would be in addition to these estimates."

Emphasis mine. Check out my previous post on East Coast hazards here.

Coming Soon...

I've blogged previously on free will, determinism, and physics. I'm sitting in this quarter on a course called "Philisophy of Quantum Mechanics". Hopefully I'll be able to address questions of randomness and probability brought up in the comments by Fez.

I'm also taking a course called "Issues in K-12 Science Education for Science Graduate Students". Hopefully our resident education expert will respond (ahem...) once I have something substantive to write about.

Until then...

A Libertarian President?

This is not a politics blog. For both pragmatic and personal reasons, I don't intend to make East Meets West my own personal sounding box on political issues. I'm not a political partisan, and I work hard to remain intellectually honest. I identify strongly with what Robin Hanson says: "My core politics is 'I don't know'; most people seem far too confident in their political opinions."

Despite these qualifications, I still stand by what I said in my first post, where I described myself as "a politically disillusioned libertarian skeptic". I'm definitely not a "large-L" libertarian of the Libertarian Party, but I do have real sympathy for classical liberal ideas.

On to my point. I read some very interesting stuff this week that got me thinking about whether someone with libertarian principles could ever become President. The first was a column by Joe Klein about how overreliance on consultants hurt the campaigns of Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004. His main point on Gore: "Gore might have been a warmer, more credible and inspiring candidate if he'd talked about the things he really wanted to talk about, like the environment". His main point on Kerry: In hindsight, Kerry's campaign manager said they focused on jobs, education, and health care because that's what people answered when pollsters asked what they were most interested in, but in truth voters "thought the President should be interested in national security." Bush won because his character seemed more Presidential than Kerry's.

Responding to Klein's column, Matthew Yglesias pointed me towards a post by Mark Schmitt of the New America Foundation on the qualities of a presidential candidate. His main point: "It's not what you say about the issues, it's what the issues say about you." For example, John McCain's stance on campaign finance reform makes him seem independent, persistent, and somewhat populist, all very presidential qualities that help in elections.

There's nothing a die-hard libertarian loves more than talking about the issues. Most of them are so damn sure they're right! But what do the issues say about libertarians?

Let's just take a few from the Libertarian Party website:

Principle: "We should eliminate the entire social welfare system."
Translation: "I hate poor people!"

Principle: "End drug prohibition."
Translation: "I don't care about children, and I'm high right now too!"

Principle: "I oppose censorship of online communication."
Translation: "I love my More Black Dirty Debutantes DVD!"

In all seriousness, are there "libertarian" issues that would play well in a presidential election? I think one is school choice, being sure to avoid the "privatization" dirty word. The public would see a candidate that care's about children and the poor, but also isn't afraid to go against the powers that be.

The real trick would be framing a "libertarian" international and security policy that doesn't make the candidate look like a wimpy isolationist.

Do I think it's possible for a candidate with libertarian principles to be successful? I think I'll give my default answer, "I don't know", and get back to work on my stump speech.

Road Trip

No longer do I doubt the size of California after taking a road trip to Southern California and Joshua Tree National Park at the end of March.

Two funny observations from the trip:

1. People in Southern California love to put large stickers on the rear windows of their cars or trucks. This is not nearly so popular in Northern California or New Jersey; is it catching on in other places around the country? My favorite decals are those that completely block out the rear window. The driver of the oversized pickup truck with low visibility, bad cornering, and propensity to roll must have decided that regular driving wasn't challenging enough, and opted to block out direct rear vision with a giant sticker that says "SoCal". The grandmother with opposing silhouettes of a "nice" angel and a "naughty" devil on the rear of her pickup is also classic.

2. "People come here to die." That was our waiter at the restaurant Zin in Palm Springs on why we should leave town as fast as possible. All my previous knowledge of Palm Springs came from episodes of Beverly Hills, 90210. (Did my parents really let me watch 90210 when I was 9 years old?) On leaving the restaurant, we almost got run over by a horde of the elderly. They really do drive them in the busful. It was like being in Atlantic City, but with more leathery skin and fewer Jersey accents.