CA fires vs Katrina

I don't see people complaining that people shouldn't be living in
Southern California with the fires they're having like they were
about people living in New Orleans when Katrina hit.

They are the same thing. People living in an area that has natural
threats aggravated by man's shortcomings.

CA - overbuilding in a natural firezone, that has fires EVERY YEAR.
NO - flooding brought about by poorly designed and built levees (that
has hurricanes every year)

I always wanted to ask when people brought up this argument, should
people live in Holland? They live below sea level too. (Of course
they should. Like it or not, there they are.)