Note that climate migration is one of the bad things that are commonly predicted by climate change models. And yes, undoubtedly there are indeed some people who move from wildfire-affected areas to protect their children, either temporarily or permanently. (I know of a few affluent families with children who did so last summer during the California wildfires). The point is that this "solution" will instead be a very large problem when, for example, significant portions of the West Coast of the United States is fleeing.
Or to put this more simply: I'm glad you live in an area that isn't affected by wildfires, but what portion of the California population (almost 40 million people) is that area prepared to permanently house in the next 5 or 10 years?
Wouldn't it make sense to start moving now before everyone tries to move while property values are still high? If everyone will need to moves in the 5, 10, 20 years why put down roots any longer in California? There is this earth quake risk that may take part of California as well soon.
Or to put this more simply: I'm glad you live in an area that isn't affected by wildfires, but what portion of the California population (almost 40 million people) is that area prepared to permanently house in the next 5 or 10 years?