It’s no secret that i think that Jen is off on her beliefs that citizens are “good” enough that governments are not needed to help provide for our in-need citizens.
At the same time, floods happen here in Manitoba with relative frequency. The smart Manitobans have learned something - “if you’re going to build on a floodplain, then prepare for a flood”. Still, our government looks after those people without the IQ-wherewithal to yield to this. How do i feel about this? Not sure - i make a LOT of money from the gov’t off of the stupidity off of people, and i can live with that for now.
By your logic, Jen, screw everyone in WTC for continue to work there after it was bombed in the 90’s. They should have known better.
Terrorism isn’t the same as recurring natural disasters and you know it.
No, but in terms of risk and unpredictability, they are. Like I said before, I’m sure insurance companies take in the fact that they are below sea level and could be wiped out by a hurricane. It would happen eventually, but I don’t think it’s frequent enough to warrant a claim that they don’t deserve help.
And concerning government assistance: I’d much rather have people who need help taking advantage of the gov’t than people who don’t need it (the rich) raping everyone else in the arse. Every time I think about the S&L deal, which we are still paying on, it pisses me off. I think the worst thing about Katrina shows that while we’ll talk and talk about how great we are and all the good things we do, we can’t even clean up the mess in our own backyard. Imagine the after effects if we weren’t pouring money & personnel into Iraq - something I could really be proud of. Look at the disaster of 9/11 compared to Katrina. A world of difference, where more people needed help in the latter, although I believe more died in the former. Since it wasn’t terrorist related, I guess it was secondary to our aims.
Thats a ridiculous comparison, they work there, and its not a hazard all the time. It was just attacked again, how did anyone know for certain it would be. for certain, new orleans will have more problems with water.
WTC had less people die then the average deaths in the Civil War. Should we prepare for civil war casualties again???
Of course not. We have to look at the real world, not fictional scenarios. We know that New Orleans WILL be hit by a hurricane in the future. We KNOW that it will cost billions in damage and hundreds of lives again. So we do one of two things:
1) We tell the people they are on their own if they are hit again. Don’t come crying to the government EXPECTING a hand out. (they might still get one, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it.)
or
2) We tell them it is illegal to move there. Turn it into camp ground and force them to move above sea level.
still pretty harsh.
Thats a ridiculous comparison, they work there, and its not a hazard all the time. It was just attacked again, how did anyone know for certain it would be. for certain, new orleans will have more problems with water.
People work in NO, and it’s obviously not a hazard to live there…otherwise no one would.
Surely New York will have more problems with terrorists, which we won’t know, just like the next Cat 5 Hurricane to hit NO.
WTC had less people die then the average deaths in the Civil War. Should we prepare for civil war casualties again???
Of course not. We have to look at the real world, not fictional scenarios. We know that New Orleans WILL be hit by a hurricane in the future. We KNOW that it will cost billions in damage and hundreds of lives again. So we do one of two things:
1) We tell the people they are on their own if they are hit again. Don’t come crying to the government EXPECTING a hand out. (they might still get one, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it.)
or
2) We tell them it is illegal to move there. Turn it into camp ground and force them to move above sea level.
What is your comparison supposed to mean?
Terrorist attacks aren’t fictional scenarios. They’ve happened, and they will happen. They’ve happened multiple times in NYC, in the same building, no less. Why doesn’t it meet your argument?
You’d better make a law before telling people it’s illegal to move there. By the way, are you against people paying taxes towards the gov’t in NO because they are also located in the doomed delta?
Jerm,
Calm down. I’m not flogging babies in the street.
Yes, as I said, we’d pass a LAW to make it illegal to live in the basin in New Orleans. Hence the term, it would be illegal to live there. We could make it a national park, wouldn’t that be grand? Meanwhile, the people too stupid to figure out they’re living in the bottom of a cereal bowl, would be forced to live in safer (at least from nature) areas. Win/Win/Win (sicne the eco-freaks would get another park!)
It’s not like we’re talking about moving the city. We’re talking about not rebuilding it in the flood plains, but rather up on the hills. How many times you gunna build that sand castle at the edge of the water during low tide and expect it to be standing the next day???
Common, you gotta use common sense. Stop building strawmen, take a look at what’s really being said, not what you perceive is being said, run it through the machine of your brain and then see if you have a valid arguement against it.
I mean really, would you prefer letting them build the city where we know, beyond a doubt, that it will get flooded out again? I mean, I view the average person as a compassionate individual willing to help out his or her fellow man, I never said I thought they were intelligent or had common sense! (if they had either, there would be no governments!)
Jerm,
Calm down. I’m not flogging babies in the street.
Don’t worry, I’m not riled up. I’m enjoying this. :-D Plus we are working on our debating skills.
Now, maybe I went too far on a tangent, but my point is: how does one decide an area is unfit to live in, and on what basis? If you think NO should not be populated because of its elevation, then why not other areas of the US? I just don’t agree that they are complete idiots for where the chose to live, and, subsequently, don’t deserve any help.
Living ON THE COAST below sea level is a rather unique situation.
When yiu have to go uphill to surf, that is a pretty good clue that you are not in the most safe place from flooding.
And yes, that goes for the Netherlands too.
People think that Bagladesh is “asking for it” with all their flood deaths, yet they are at least a few feet ABOVE sea level, unlike NO.
The problem with getting flood insurance Jen is many. Insurance companies will argue and say it was a hurricane, not a flood. And if you require flood insurance for anybody living below sea level, then insurances would be able to charge more because they know you have no other choice. The government should not support a city like New Orleans by building levies and accepting their tax money, and then when the city becomes flooded you watch them die for a week for two. The government cant take taxes from people and not help them when they are in extreme danger, epically in such mass numbers.
it took 72 hours after the breech of the levees for the National gaurd to get there in mass. After the storm came many people thought the city dodged a bullet. At the last moments the levees collapsed, water was coming in quickly in the first days. What do you do, send in troops and other people and resources while the water is rising, so they can get stuck in the city also. You had to wait a while, for logistics and so you dont have to take extra time saving the men who are supposed to be saving others. Also there were so many reports of looting, gang activity and other terrible crimes going on, you had an all white heirarchy that did not want to go in there and get swamped by largely african amercian crowds and have to try and fend them off. They would look terrible trying to do what they had to do, they knew the liberal media would have a hey day on such an occurance. It would look terrible for america as a whole if you sent in some troops and trucks to the dome and they were over run by thousands of people looking for help at once. Then what do you do, let all your equipment and resources immdediately be pillaged? They would then fight each other for the foodstuffs and medical supplies. Chaos. Or do you order troops to fight back, white troops on black crowds, let me tell you that’s the last thing the powers to be wanted and they were terrified of it. Just remember, its all bush’s fault, thats all that is said now and all you need to know i guess.
Now, maybe I went too far on a tangent, but my point is: how does one decide an area is unfit to live in, and on what basis? If you think NO should not be populated because of its elevation, then why not other areas of the US? I just don’t agree that they are complete idiots for where the chose to live, and, subsequently, don’t deserve any help.
Well, and I’m speaking personally here, I would start with the number of deaths per square foot, amount of damage per square foot and the likelyhood of the situation happening again and again and again.
In the case of the Mississippi River and New Orleans (and similar) these are recurring natural phenomenon. We know it’ll happen again sometime. So how many lives are we willing to sacrifice so we can have a city below sea level? Why not just save all future lives and put them up on the hill this time?
As for insurance, yes, well they will raise their rates in that area. Insurance companies are not the government, they are for profit organizations. They realize, even if the populace doesnt, that living in an area prone to flooding is a bad investment. So to offset the risk, they’ll charge you a premium. That way, when they pay out, they’ll still have shown a profit.
You want lower insurance rates? Move to higher ground, stupid! hehe.
completely will completly disagree. I think the media had a heyday with people getting rapped at the dome and dieing there. With your reasoning they should never have gone into New Orleans to stop the riots and crime because the government would look racist. It should not be a racist mind set in the government from the start when a major city is a disaster zone. You certainly have to put some of the fault on Bush, but every level of government failed. Without government at any level, the city tore itself apart. I hope they did not have Balung’s mindset of let the blacks fight it out. What about those elderly homes that were left with no one to care for them? How about the fact that shelters would NOT take pets so people stayed at home because they could not leave their pets behind. It was a horrible scene. I hope we learned something from it, but America will forget about it in 5-10 years, until another hurricane hits sometime.
The whole pets thing and evacuations has always bothered me.
Back when I had the 8 acre farm an hour inland from Myrtle beach, it was common knowledge in the Pagan Community in the region that in the event of a hurricane my home and land was open to people AND their pets. A safe haven for the ENTIRE family, not just the humans.
One of the main reasons this is an issue though is the lack of planning on the part of people in potential disaster areas. If you have pets and you live in the hurricane zone, you have a pre-existing plan on where to go long before the storm hits… and you plan on a place that will take you and your 4-legged family members.
But that goes back to personal responsibility and taking care of yourself. Too many folks effected by Katrina expected to be cared for. And that (other than living in a coastal city below sea level) was the genesis of the problems that followed…
@ncscswitch:
The whole pets thing and evacuations has always bothered me.
Back when I had the 8 acre farm an hour inland from Myrtle beach, it was common knowledge in the Pagan Community in the region that in the event of a hurricane my home and land was open to people AND their pets. A safe haven for the ENTIRE family, not just the humans.
One of the main reasons this is an issue though is the lack of planning on the part of people in potential disaster areas. If you have pets and you live in the hurricane zone, you have a pre-existing plan on where to go long before the storm hits… and you plan on a place that will take you and your 4-legged family members.
But that goes back to personal responsibility and taking care of yourself. Too many folks effected by Katrina expected to be cared for. And that (other than living in a coastal city below sea level) was the genesis of the problems that followed…
100% Agree.
In times of trouble people should, and usually do, pull together for the common good of all. After trouble hits you find opportunists, yes. And that is when the government (local level, maybe regional level) should step in to arrest the perpetrators.
I know if my town got hit by a few tornados and many homes were destroyed anyone left would open the doors so that others can at least sleep with a roof over their heads for a while. I’m sure that’s the case the whole world over.
@ncscswitch:
The whole pets thing and evacuations has always bothered me.
Planning ahead…
Imagine the difficulties of having separate shelters for these groups in order to be culturally sensative…
@ncscswitch:
Back when I had the 8 acre farm an hour inland from Myrtle beach, it was common knowledge in the Pagan Community in the region that in the event of a hurricane my home and land was open to people AND their pets. A safe haven for the ENTIRE family, not just the humans.
Were Jews, Christians, Muslims, Ba’hai, Covens, JWs, etc. welcome, too?? :-)
By planning I did NOT mean Government planning. I meant PERSONAL planning. YOU plan in advance where you are going to go and how to get there.
Remember, I am a Libertarian which means PERSONAL responsibility.
As for others being welcome… Yes, they would have been. But the information was only distributed via Pagan outlets.It is not like I could have put the entire Carolina Coast up in my house.
Of course it is no longer an issue as I sold the Farm 2 years ago.
BTW, anyone find out what happened to the billions in tax revenue gathered over the years to rebuild the dykes that were never rebuilt? Oh yea, they built casinos and bought new busses…guess those busses did a lot of good, flooded as they were…and those Casinos probably sheltered a few people!
This is why people need to be responsible forthemselves, and stop looking to the govenment for a hand out. Governments are money grubbing evil organizations that should be kept in check by rifle point as often as necessary so they don’t inflict themselves on the populace. NO was just another case that supports that statement. The state and feds failed them but worse, the city who had been taxing them in excess to fix the problems that the Army Corps of Engineers cited failed them to the extreme!
The mayor and govenor should be run out of the state on a rail, if not put in jail for the rest of their lives for not taking adequate measures to ensure that the massive loss of life in New Orleans and the billions of dollars in destruction never came around. It’s negligent homicide at least, if not outright, premeditated murder by ommission of acting. They had the funds, they had the warning, they did nothing.
But they’re democrats, so they’ll be fine!
The mayor and govenor should be run out of the state on a rail, if not put in jail for the rest of their lives for not taking adequate measures to ensure that the massive loss of life in New Orleans and the billions of dollars in destruction never came around. It’s negligent homicide at least, if not outright, premeditated murder by ommission of acting. They had the funds, they had the warning, they did nothing.
a
Make up your mind. Is it the people who live there or the gubbament’s fault?
It’s partially the government’s fault when they are told to fix something, they raise taxes to do it, then squander the taxes. They told the people they were safe because the problems were being fixed and then didn’t fix them!
If they hadn’t done that, it would be 100% the people’s responsibility. If they go back in now, with 20/20 hindsite, no matter what it’s their fault if htey get hit again.
