“a place where most prudent people WOULD NOT live for any reason”
“people who live where nature does not favor their tranquility get what they paid for - trouble”
Indeed. But I have news for you - by your apparent defintion of “nature does not favor”, MOST of this country would be “packed up and shipped out”.
My region in MD is probably the ideal place to live. However, we do OCCASIONALLY suffer major catastrophic flooding from hurricanes (1972), major snowstorms (2010 record-setting event), and other random acts of God. That doesn’t mean we should ignore how marvelously blessed it is 95% of the time and abandon it. NJ hardly suffers from hurricanes more than MD does - although it IS 1 giant flood plain/marsh, indeed, as is our Eastern Shore.
Just about every part of the country is prone to some sort of natural disaster; earth quakes, wild fires, mud slides, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, blizzards, sand storms, etc. For the most part the mid-Atlantic and NE is pretty calm most of the time compared to other parts of the country. I for one could not imagine living in CA or in tornado alley or in Buffalo.
MOST of this country would be “packed up and shipped out”.
“Most of this country” is a vast over-statement by a million miles.
You use the term “most” far too liberally - get a map of Maryland and a map of New Jersey; MOST of the land of either is not sitting on the atlantic ocean shore line.
MOST of Maryland and MOST of New Jersey and MOST residents of both states, are not located/residing where the impact of large storms from the coast (they have the largest impact here in the northeast) have the MOST and MOST devastating impact - which is near the shore as opposed to away from it.
MOST of us do not reside where nature intends to constantly unmake and remake our ocean shoreline, in processes that include the major storms, in processes that created them. MOST of us live inland enough, and some even just inland enough that if nature was allowed to do what she has done along our shores for thousands of years, without too much concern from us (because we had not planted ourselves in the way in very large and unnecessary numbers) then we would be far less concerned about these storms, still be of the same size as we are in population, comfortably, obtain far less damages from them, and still be residing in MOST of the land of our states.
And, even when it comes to our rivers, we have begun the steps here in New Jersey to buying out the residents in those places where river flooding occurs most often, creating open green spaces where a river in a storm can expand into and retract from, as needed, instead of all of us paying again and again and again to rescue the property and infrastructure sitting in what should be a natural flood plain.
That’s what the area in Moonachie New Jersey and all around MetLife stadium is - a natural, swampy, wetland, tideland area where the sleepy Hackensack River flowing through there nearly at sea level would be no problem to a population of the present size in northern New Jersey, if it was given the open space nature always left to it.
I am not opposed, in general to people living in places that are perennially endangered places from natural causes. But as long as the rest of us are taxed to bail them out of the consequences of choosing to live there, instead of those who live there and there alone incurring 100% of the costs of always rebuilding, including the infrastructure, then I am more in favor of buying them out so nature’s natural flood plains become public green spaces and yes even if that means some coastlines are multi-mile long ribbon like state parks.