Why is an earthquake more common in San Francisco California than Boston Massachusetts?

Answer 1

I can think of several reasons:

The building standards are higher in San Francisco.

The building standards are conformed to in San Francisco; in some Third World earthquakes, poorly built buildings have contributed to the disaster.

San Francisco has a history of earthquakes, so building standards are designed to take into account the fact that earthquakes may well happen.

The emergency services are better funded.

The US infrastructure should handle disasters better than third world countries.

Answer 2

even earthquakes have some technology to follow. the main reason for earthquakes to occur is "obstructing the natural ways of nature to occur". for example, constructing dams, roads, buildings and many more. this will block the nature to emit its radiation on what is said to be first and second world countries and the whole energy flow through the way the nature gets that is nothing but the third world countries that are under developed and have free flow of nature in and out

Answer 3

San Francisco is located near the San Andreas Fault, where tectonic plates meet and create a higher risk for earthquakes. Boston is located further inland and away from major fault lines, reducing the likelihood of experiencing frequent earthquakes. Geographical proximity to tectonic plate boundaries is a key factor in determining earthquake frequency in a particular region.

Answer 4

because of the San Andreas fault in California