Just the kind of headline the people who don't like rich people are likely to engage with.

So my take is that the rich rebuild faster and then it burns again, while a poor mans hone only burns once. And also rich people do more insurance fraud, because it requires something worth insuring in the first place.

No offense to the study but the first paragraph explains everything:

Frequently located on hillsides and in canyons surrounded by wildlands, rich neighborhoods are more likely to catch fire. However, a UC Riverside study shows they are also likely to recover faster than lower-income areas.

Poor can't effort burning

He... he... hehehehe

(sorry)

Sounds like that needs more real world data, just to help science, you know.

Sickos: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!

I like to imagine the researchers as crazy arsonists with clipboards.

Nationally, neighborhoods with higher proportions of white residents had lower odds of experiencing fire. In California and other dry parts of the West, however, that relationship was reversed, with white as well as Black populations experiencing greater odds of exposure.

Why do americans always looks for that correlation? Why is never, I don't know, bimbos and whatever are male bimbos called, for example?

Edit: according to wikipedia it's himbo

Finally, a headline I can get behind!

Finally a study with valid and applicable results.

But not likely enough!!!!!