Lives and Property During the Climate Change

This article

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/15/extreme-heat-deaths-government-agencies-00176697

has spurred my thoughts today on this subject. There are two ways of looking at the issue of how much help government should offer when property and lives are in danger: one, is the damage to lives and communities around them as significant as damage by water, wind, and cold to property; how much should government interfere in our free society and economy to assist the low-income people?

The Democrats have been focusing for some time on various ways to make life better for our citizens, but without spend a lot of money or creating new government bureaucracies. Naturally, part of that is to deal with people who are vulnerable to food, health, education, and other life-critical issues. School lunch programs, child-care programs, food assistance, and cheaper healthcare have all been on the agenda. One that gets a bit less attention is emergency assistance (see FEMA) for natural disasters, such as flooding, forest fires, mud-slides, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. The article talks about excessive heat and cold due to the climate change problem we're facing. Clearly, to be fair, those who receive benefits when the weather is very cold, should not be given more attention than those who are suffering from lack of properly insulated homes and air conditioning (air pumps as well as other technologies). The government should be fair with most everything, but life-critical issues calls for the most attention to fairness.

The other perspective on this issue is more economic. When and why should government interfere with the natural processes of our society, it's economic functioning, and outcomes? For example, where there are forest fires and private homes or where there is semi-regular severe flooding and storming (tornadoes or hurricanes), there is government assistance to rebuild and insure properties. What about the lives in harms way? Should lives be  considered when we wonder whether government should provide pre-disaster aid? We provide assistance for the purchase of cold-weather technologies like heating and home insulation. Should we also provide air conditioning or other assistance where temperatures are more than unbearable, but are life-threatening?

Solving this kind of balancing of interests: private free life with consequences and governmental interference to protect against fraud or other consequences, is very important in our Democratic system. Politicians have to deal with this kind of issue all the time. In recent years, the Republicans have become hard-hearted and stone-cold. Democrats haven't been able to pass laws to appease our "bleeding hearts". 

The balance has been difficult, but some progress has been made by Obama and Biden. I hope we can find a way to see the need to protect human lives and to be more fair with governmental policies wrt life-threatening situations.