Building to protect occupants and building to make the structure salvageable afterwards may be two different goals. Think crumple zones in cars.

We were speaking in the context of fires previously - in which case it's usually more about preserving the neighbourhood and land than anything else, you have to evacuate regardless.

Earthquakes are different and you'd need a house that stood anyway (though I'd guess most houses don't have a problem with earthquakes insofar as not collapsing on inhabitants, though they'd probably be damaged)

Loss of life from fire and earthquake isnt really high enough to be a concern. This is primarily a cost and inconvenience question.