posted
True, but I think the Bush admin take a different tact. The whole "War on Terror" angle lends itself to good soundbites and tough sounding talking. "Hunt down the bad guys" and "Bring it on!" are a path they've chosen to go down far more than "We're prudently planning, keeping soldiers in standby incase of severe weather, I know they're not out there kicking ass but they're doing an important job" etc. And when they're running so heavily on that angle I'd imagine the last thing they want to do is look as stunned and floundering when an attack hits as they've appeared after this disaster. It almost seems as if they've been on the blocks for an attack, itching to go, ready to kick terrorist ass - then it's kicked off and they stand blinking thinking "Wait... a hurricane? Wha...?"
Posts: 1710 | From: Newcastle, UK | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: So the great majority of people who play life by the rules, not to mention community leaders, left, leaving behind a combination of the weak and friendless,* on the one hand, and people who are scofflaws or worse.
I wanted to quote this again, because it's really been grating on me. As Cherie Priest has said, "If every single person in New Orleans had a spare $300 and [access to] a car, most of them could have run. Now turn on the TV again and look at how many stayed." (My emendation.)
What does that say about how 20% of the population of a city in _the richest nation in the world_ live? And then to hear the white-bread cluelessness of the commentators who blame them for not leaving??? This is more than outrageous; it's an obscenity.
-------------------- ~~Ai am in mai prrrrrraime!~~ Posts: 10111 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read at least one account from a woman who took refuge in the Superdome who wanted to leave NOLA on Sunday, but was told by her boss that if she didn't show up to work on Tuesday, she'd be fired. I have to wonder how many other people faced that kind of situation; afraid that if they left the city, they wouldn't make it back in soon enough to go to work and would lose their jobs.
Posts: 160 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had to go to early morning court in Raleigh, NC (about 5 hours away) when Frances(?) was predicted to hit there several years ago. I called the court the day before to see if court had been cancelled. When they said no I asked, "Don't you know a hurricane is predicted to hit you tomorrow morning?" They could care less and if court was scheduled and I didn't show up I would've been in major trouble. So that night I got within 60 miles or so of Raleigh and the weather was so bad I got a motel room. Of course Raleigh took a direct hit and the city was closed down for several days, but there didn't seem to be any advance planning as far as cancellations, etc.
-------------------- No man has a right in America to treat any other man "tolerantly" for tolerance is the assumption of superiority. -Wendell L. Willkie Posts: 3833 | From: Virginia | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dissonance: I read at least one account from a woman who took refuge in the Superdome who wanted to leave NOLA on Sunday, but was told by her boss that if she didn't show up to work on Tuesday, she'd be fired.
My first thought was - And did her boss get out of the city?
It's a tough decision, but if faced with a choice between my job and my life, I'd have to go with the latter. I can always find another job...
posted
Hell, I remember the stories I heard last hurricane season. When Charley was coming to make a DIRECT HIT on Orlando, many businesses refused to close until there was less than six hours left to leave the area. The Olive Garden near me was not only doing this, but threatened to fire any employees who evacuated.
Oh, and yea, I'd tell them to piss off and look for another job too, but for some people, they just can't afford that. It should be a crime for people to force employees to stay in a dangerous situation when the job itself is not hazardous (i.e. clerks, office workers, servers).
-------------------- "One original thought is worth a thousand mindless quotings." -- Diogenes
"Vote Republican! We won't burn you at the stake for your religious beliefs or slaughter your family and steal your land." -- Ramblin' Dave Posts: 3555 | From: Florida | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dissonance: I read at least one account from a woman who took refuge in the Superdome who wanted to leave NOLA on Sunday, but was told by her boss that if she didn't show up to work on Tuesday, she'd be fired.
My first thought was - And did her boss get out of the city?
It's a tough decision, but if faced with a choice between my job and my life, I'd have to go with the latter. I can always find another job...
You have to remember, though, NOLA has been evacuated before (3 times in the last year, I read), and storms have turned, so things have been fine. I think a lot of people had evacuation fatigue, and didn't know the choice this time was between your job and (potentially) your life.
Posts: 160 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I realize that hindsight is 20/20 and that there's no good way to know how I'd react to that kind of ultimatum in real life.
Just the thought of being put into that kind of position by someone makes me sick, though. Thank goodness I work at a company that tells us that if we feel that we need to leave because we fear for our safety, that we can. And also that what we "fear" are relatively mild ice and wind storms (with an occasional earthquake/mudslide thrown in for variety).
(ETA - I still wish I could find out if the boss - or whoever was responsible - got out. It would be nice to know if instant Karma caught up with her)
quote:Originally posted by dissonance: You have to remember, though, NOLA has been evacuated before (3 times in the last year, I read), and storms have turned, so things have been fine. I think a lot of people had evacuation fatigue, and didn't know the choice this time was between your job and (potentially) your life.
The National Weather Service issued warnings on Sunday that made it very clear that this storm was unprecidented, and was to be taken very seriously.
I have read lots of warnings, but nothing made my blood turn cold like those.
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can just guess that the same people who opine that "no job is worth dying for" would say that people living in poverty should just "get jobs."
As Chloe said earlier, evacuating was a non-option for a lot of these people. Not a difficult, uncertain, or dangerous option, but a non option. Now we have asshats at FEMA blaming the dead for not leaving, which infuriated me to no end. We pay taxes like crazy so that when disaster strikes, we don't have anarchy.
This probably wouldn't be as clear to me as it is if I didn't try to figure out what I would do. Even being a white, middle-class yuppie with a car in Brooklyn, I'd still be fucked. I would be in no position to purchase a plane or train ticket, and my car would be useless. If NYC was evacuated, the roads would be completely gridlocked. You truly encounter huge difficulties navigating this city in rush hour. I've seen queues of hundreds of people for subways because one fucking line is out of commission. God help us if we ever need to evacuate. I am seriously going to start getting in better graces with my friends who own a boat or a plane.
It speaks of how truly uninformed we all are about poverty in America that we don't get how impossible an evacuation would be. Not only do these people have no savings, they can't take out a loan or get a credit card, so short of using a gun to get onto a ride out, they had no options.
And I can't shake the thought that there are still people starving to death in their attics. Bill Maher said last night that "the difference between George Bush and Marie Antoinette is that in that situation, they had cake."
But for real, I am terribly embarrased for my country right now.
Ana
-------------------- My great grandfather planted that tree! Posts: 4862 | From: Brooklyn | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
ETA: What I was really trying to say is that this issue far transcends this particular tragedy. A whole fucking lot of Americans are living on a razor sharp edge of utter financial disaster, and it increases every day.
A huge, preventable, fixable thing happened, and many more people than necessary died. We need to realize how completely we've abandoned our lower classes. Like I said, I am a non-minority white yuppie in Brooklyn, with a consistently employed blue-collar husband and well-paying work, and we still have no money left at the end of the month.
I can't imagine what these people are enduring and will continue to endure for months.
-------------------- My great grandfather planted that tree! Posts: 4862 | From: Brooklyn | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't say anything about poor people getting jobs. Apples and oranges. I was also referring to a specific instance, not making a blanket statement.
I'm not blaming people for not leaving because they couldn't. I'm not even blaming anyone for not going in and dragging someone kicking and screaming when that someone didn't want to go. I also heard the warnings that were given for 2 days, and am more surprised that people are actually surprised at the result; but I'm not from that part of the country, and wasn't as aware of the false alarms as some are.
What is really at the root of my comment is my irritation at the thought that one adult can tell another adult (essentially) "I don't care if you think you're in danger, we want you here no matter what." Maybe her boss was told that too, and is also a victim of the policy, but the fact remains that if one person is on record as having been told to stay, then you can figure there are many more besides her. I wonder how many more would have left willingly if they thought they had the option.
quote:Originally posted by Ana Ng: ETA: What I was really trying to say is that this issue far transcends this particular tragedy. A whole fucking lot of Americans are living on a razor sharp edge of utter financial disaster, and it increases every day.
A huge, preventable, fixable thing happened, and many more people than necessary died. We need to realize how completely we've abandoned our lower classes. Like I said, I am a non-minority white yuppie in Brooklyn, with a consistently employed blue-collar husband and well-paying work, and we still have no money left at the end of the month.
I can't imagine what these people are enduring and will continue to endure for months.
I'm drawing a blank on his name - I'm sure someone will chime in - the guy who did "Supersize Me". Anyway, he has (had? haven't seen it recently) a tv series now. For the first episode, he and his fiance gave up everything and tried to live on minimum wage for 30 days. It only gave a taste of minimum wage life, but it obviously wasn't a good thing.
quote:Originally posted by Chloe: Does it occur to you that such people may well have plenty of friends, but that are communities in which owning a car is not the norm?
Are you saying that the fleet of automobiles in some residential New Orleans neighborhoods is too small to squeeze in all the residents in case of emergency evacuation? Or are you saying that people being unwilling and/or afraid to help out their neighbors in event of emergency by giving them a ride is a problem government can and should fix?
If the former -- physicially, not enough cars -- more of a government role is indeed needed. I just tried to google on car ownership rates and failed to find anything that would decide this question.
If the latter, we need to look at our urban policy in a broader perspective. Elsewhere, you suggested this broader perspective in your mention of people needing $300 and a car. I suppose that questioning this is one more thing that will grate on you. However, if you ever are in the market for a honest description of life among the US urban poor, I recommend the book Promises I Can Keep : Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage . The authors probably would not grate on you as they are quite sympathetic to their subjects. However, I got my hypothesis concerning the non-evacuation rate being due to people in poor New Orleans neighborhoods having precarious social networks and not trusting their neighbors from pondering some of what authors Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas write in that book.
The subject of whether avoiding grating on liberal sensibilities is good for the poor is indeed a big and important one, too big to get into here. My perspective is close to that seen in America's best social policy magazine, City Journal.
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't singling you out, sorry. I was speaking to the sentiment I've heard expressed by people in the past few days.
I just think middle-class Americans and up have a really isolated, ignorant attitude about what it means to be poor. It comes out in my posts here in rants about college, pregnancy, etc, but it comes back to the same problems.
We have ignored the needs and interests of this entire class. The cycle of poverty is built on lack of opportunity. We truly give a meager handout via welfare and such, but it's hard to get past poverty and make a decent life for yourself. We need to fix this virtual caste system we have going.
A very wise man once said:
quote:"The streets are a short stop/Either you're slinging crack rock/Or you've got a wicked jump shot"
...
I think that really sums it up.
Ana
-------------------- My great grandfather planted that tree! Posts: 4862 | From: Brooklyn | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ana Ng: ...I just think middle-class Americans and up have a really isolated, ignorant attitude about what it means to be poor. It comes out in my posts here in rants about college, pregnancy, etc, but it comes back to the same problems.
We have ignored the needs and interests of this entire class. The cycle of poverty is built on lack of opportunity...
Sorry, but that's all bullshit.
First to paint the entire middle class as ignorant as to what it means to be poor?!? Are you serious?
I'm firmly in the middle class. I grew up with so little that as we kids we had to figure out how to make a meal for four out of 3 eggs or two slice of balogna. When I was first married we lived on mac & cheese and ramon noodles for weeks, walking to work becaus we couldn't afford gasoline for the car.
Now my kids go to a school where half the students live below the poverty line. Do you really think that I or any other middle class parent in that school are isolate or ignorant of the poor? Do you really think that everyone in the middle class grew up in a middle class existance?
When it comes to opportunity my kids are far from the advantaged. They face paying for college on their own, or with my help while their friends are eligiable for scholorships based on need. My kids will have to work much harder to get their college education than poorer kids who sit next to them in class.
There is a cultural problem that needs to be solved. Many of these kids don't have anyone in their household pushing their education both now and in the future. That's the basic requirement that is lacking. Quite honestly, I am at a lost as to how to solve that. But we won't even begin to find a solution as long as we blame in on the middle class or the government.
Beach...I was not given my place in the middle class, I earned it...Life!
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: Are you saying that the fleet of automobiles in some residential New Orleans neighborhoods is too small to squeeze in all the residents in case of emergency evacuation? Or are you saying that people being unwilling and/or afraid to help out their neighbors in event of emergency by giving them a ride is a problem government can and should fix?
People in well-to-do neighborhoods will take themselves, their families, their pets, and as many of their valuables as they can. They are *not* going to turn off into the inner city and offer a ride to a single resident.
The very notion is incredibly stupid. It would break up the poor families; it would leave children separated from parents. It would lead to more cases of missing persons.
The government (city, state, or federal) should have commandeered as many school buses -- even private buses, requisitioning them on an emergency basis from Greyhound and Trailways -- and gotten people out in an organized fashion.
The idea of privatizing an evacuation is completely unworkable.
Silas
Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Steve Eisenberg , I second Pogue that you have made a very interesting, well thought out and intelligent observation.
Many problems with the evac of the poor class in any society lies in its distrust of authority and its relativelly closed community borders.
To loosly tag onto something Chloe spoke to, in the city of Chicago, many middle, upper-middle and even the older wealthy do not own a car. It is not always worth while to keep a vehicle in the city of public transport and high parking and insurance rates. I wonder (very self-rightously, thanks for noticing) if more effort would be made to transport that class of folks. In this case Steve Eisenberg's observation of friendless is quite accurate.
-------------------- As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. Posts: 1679 | From: Illinois | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: Are you saying that the fleet of automobiles in some residential New Orleans neighborhoods is too small to squeeze in all the residents in case of emergency evacuation? Or are you saying that people being unwilling and/or afraid to help out their neighbors in event of emergency by giving them a ride is a problem government can and should fix?
People in well-to-do neighborhoods will take themselves, their families, their pets, and as many of their valuables as they can. They are *not* going to turn off into the inner city and offer a ride to a single resident.
The very notion is incredibly stupid.
I certainly suggested no such thing. Most people help their relatives, friends, and neighbors they know and trust. This is consistent with my post.
Usually I figure it must be poorly written if misunderstood. I don't really see it this time but may just need to hire Silas as my editor here.
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BeachLife: Sorry, but that's all bullshit.
All of it?
quote:First to paint the entire middle class as ignorant as to what it means to be poor?!? Are you serious?
Perhaps I should have said "upper middle class", even though I suppose the problem is really the mega wealthy and the uneven distribution of wealth.
quote:I'm firmly in the middle class. I grew up with so little that as we kids we had to figure out how to make a meal for four out of 3 eggs or two slice of balogna. When I was first married we lived on mac & cheese and ramon noodles for weeks, walking to work becaus we couldn't afford gasoline for the car.
That's entirely different. I'm talking about people who don't understand that poor people in this country cannot just easily "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" and get somewhere. My mother's family was a poor, Long Island Irish Catholic brood of six kids, and my mother's brothers have all done well for themselves- in contstruction, trucking, owning a restaurant/bar, but I just can't see that scenario playing out for these inner-city kids.
quote:Now my kids go to a school where half the students live below the poverty line. Do you really think that I or any other middle class parent in that school are isolate or ignorant of the poor? Do you really think that everyone in the middle class grew up in a middle class existance?
When it comes to opportunity my kids are far from the advantaged. They face paying for college on their own, or with my help while their friends are eligiable for scholorships based on need. My kids will have to work much harder to get their college education than poorer kids who sit next to them in class.
There is a cultural problem that needs to be solved. Many of these kids don't have anyone in their household pushing their education both now and in the future. That's the basic requirement that is lacking. Quite honestly, I am at a lost as to how to solve that. But we won't even begin to find a solution as long as we blame in on the middle class or the government.
Beach...I was not given my place in the middle class, I earned it...Life!
I don't blame the middle class for anything besides being not cognizant of the true meaning of poverty. A constant refrain of "why didn't they evacuate?" is leading me to believe that there is a divide between what people think being socio-economically disadvantaged in the US today is all about and reality. Just the notion that people who stayed and died had an option galls me. I've spoken to people about this and heard their opinions, and many people think that the circumstances of poverty can be changed as long as you "want to work."
I was also offered many jobs during my search that were well below a living wage, jobs that would have paid twice the hourly salary in the the economy of the late 1990's. It's so incredibly hard right now to just squeak by in many parts of America, no matter how you slice it.
Ana
-------------------- My great grandfather planted that tree! Posts: 4862 | From: Brooklyn | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer: The idea of privatizing an evacuation is completely unworkable.
Why? It arguably worked well* in America's poorest state, Mississippi. Maybe Biloxi and Gulfport have a higher car ownership rate than New Orleans, but I certainly wouldn't jump to that conclusion without some evidence.
___________________________ * I may change my mind on this over the next year or so. But don't jump to too many conclusions. Consider:
quote:After putting the estimated death toll at 100 on Tuesday, Spraggins pulled back the figure Wednesday, saying it was wrong. He said officials knew the death toll was 40 as of noon Tuesday, but a final figure was unavailable. Part of the error was that officials had believed 30 people were swept away at Biloxi's Quiet Water Beach apartments. While the complex was devastated, the death toll there probably was much lower, Spraggins said.
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read what you wrote to mean the people in NOLA who did not have any way to access transportation were in such a fix because they didn't have any friends. As in, everyone must know someone with a car, unless they have no friends. That's an error in thinking. It's entirely possible to have many good friends and still know no one with reliable transportation in a city like NOLA. Especially if said person is poor. Even if one did know someone with a car, the car's owner most likely has more friends/family hoping for a ride than he has room, even if he fills the thing up like a clown car.
-------------------- This used to be the life, but I don't need another one. MyBandwagon Posts: 3254 | From: small town Texas | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Starla: I read what you wrote to mean the people in NOLA who did not have any way to access transportation were in such a fix because they didn't have any friends. As in, everyone must know someone with a car, unless they have no friends. That's an error in thinking. It's entirely possible to have many good friends and still know no one with reliable transportation in a city like NOLA. Especially if said person is poor. Even if one did know someone with a car, the car's owner most likely has more friends/family hoping for a ride than he has room, even if he fills the thing up like a clown car.
This seems to imply that almost everyone wanted to evacuate, but many were stopped because their friends and neighbors cars were already loaded to capacity and beyond. This is really a factual question. There will be many books written about this disaster in the next year or two, and we will get a better perspective at this time.
One thing I will be asking myself while reading is whether the smaller but still, in certain neighborhoods, poor, Mississippi cities had more successful evacuations, and, if so, why?
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Spryte: aren't there 100s dead in gulfport and biloxi?
One thing we know about disaster death statistics is that they take a long time to become anywhere near accurate. There generally is a point in a disaster sequence where the publicly released death toll is way too high. Now, Mississippi, unlike New Orleans, was hit by a major hurricane, perhaps of unprecedented strength for that area, so, yes, a lot of people died.
I do feel a little ghoulish minimizing this thing while people are still suffering so badly. For that reason, I would never start a thread to make the kind of points I am making here. However, when people, long before the facts are in, unfairly attack my country ("Can This Actually Be Happening in America?"), I feel no responsbility to wait until all facts are known to respond. Chloe said my posts are grating on her. True, I fear. Just as blame America first, before facts are in, grates on me. Ideally this isn't the time for partisan backbiting so prevalent here on snopes; this column makes the point well.
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I was somewhat surprised at the reaction of the government. Given the size of the US army and air force, both renowned for fast deployment times when necessary, it seems amazing that the situation in New Orleans was allowed to deteriorate, with policemen and national guardsmen pressed into unfamilar peacekeeping roles. The behaviour of the mayor and governor, however frustrated they might be, is also shocking. Cursing during an interview shows a total lack of self-control, and declaring war on looters and boasting about the killing ability of the soldiers dispatched to New Orleans to quell riots seems likely to exacerbate the situation rather than defuse it. All in all, the reactions of the federal and national governments have not been impressive. The entire gulf coast is in complete chaos; I find it impossible to believe that a country as rich, powerful and technologically proficient as the USA could not have averted the majority of this disaster.
Posts: 388 | From: Scotland | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer: The idea of privatizing an evacuation is completely unworkable.
Why? It arguably worked well* in America's poorest state, Mississippi. Maybe Biloxi and Gulfport have a higher car ownership rate than New Orleans, but I certainly wouldn't jump to that conclusion without some evidence.
NOLA is a metropolitan area with a fairly decent public transport system. The Gulf Coast of Missisippi is, by and large, rural. The cost of keeping a vehicle in a non-urban area is significantly less than keeping a vehicle in a city.
I have heard reports that of the 485,000 people who live in New Orleans, 100,000 utilize public transportation, so the assumption that has been made is that those people do not have cars (some of them may, but it is a reasonable assumption that most do not).
It is also, because of the variances in population density, why the death toll in Mississippi would be very much lower than in NOLA, not because a greater proportion of people evacuated, but because there are fewer people who live there (MS).
Does that make any sense?
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: Are you saying that the fleet of automobiles in some residential New Orleans neighborhoods is too small to squeeze in all the residents in case of emergency evacuation? Or are you saying that people being unwilling and/or afraid to help out their neighbors in event of emergency by giving them a ride is a problem government can and should fix?
People in well-to-do neighborhoods will take themselves, their families, their pets, and as many of their valuables as they can. They are *not* going to turn off into the inner city and offer a ride to a single resident.
The very notion is incredibly stupid. It would break up the poor families; it would leave children separated from parents. It would lead to more cases of missing persons.
The government (city, state, or federal) should have commandeered as many school buses -- even private buses, requisitioning them on an emergency basis from Greyhound and Trailways -- and gotten people out in an organized fashion.
The idea of privatizing an evacuation is completely unworkable.
Silas
I totally agree Silas. I find it incredible that even in the "home of the brave and land of the free", the government virtually said "If you have a car or a friend with a car, get out, but if you don't, tough luck, no-one's going to help you escape." Instead they left the people there for 5 days until total anarchy breaks out, and then their response to try to make it look as if they're doing something is to say "We're sending in troops with orders to shoot to kill." Not every problem can be solved by shooting people.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the amount of devastation is what took all of the emergency people by surprise. Bush mentioned that the area affected is larger than Great Britain. In the past, the hurricanes that hit the coast usually weakened considerably first. The ones that didn't weaken hit limited areas and no major cities (sorry Mobile).
Getting aid into the center of something like that means setting up supply centers on the edges (which are not predictable) and then arranging transportation to get it where it is needed. Good roads need to be found, and equipment needs to be moved in and fuel needs to be arranged for all of the transportation needs going in and coming out. Since the power is out and most of the area won't get it back anytime soon, the problems are compounded by communications still being out for most of the area.
Has this taken too long? I think so. But, I do not think it was because of the race of the victims. I think it was because of the ineptitude of FEMA. By wanting to centralize the relief effort so as not to duplicate effort, they have been throwing the biggest monkey in the wrench imaginable.
I live less than a day's drive from NOLA. Early this week, I called the Red Cross in Tulsa to see if I could volunteer to help and was told to come to a meeting in Tulsa after the holiday weekend. As frustrating as that is, would it do any good for me to just go down and become part of the problem?
-------------------- Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana. Posts: 109 | From: Inola, Oklahoma | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Drummk: Personally I was somewhat surprised at the reaction of the government. Given the size of the US army and air force, both renowned for fast deployment times when necessary, it seems amazing that the situation in New Orleans was allowed to deteriorate, with policemen and national guardsmen pressed into unfamilar peacekeeping roles. The behaviour of the mayor and governor, however frustrated they might be, is also shocking. Cursing during an interview shows a total lack of self-control, and declaring war on looters and boasting about the killing ability of the soldiers dispatched to New Orleans to quell riots seems likely to exacerbate the situation rather than defuse it. All in all, the reactions of the federal and national governments have not been impressive. The entire gulf coast is in complete chaos; I find it impossible to believe that a country as rich, powerful and technologically proficient as the USA could not have averted the majority of this disaster.
But America is a republic, and the government cannot just go running in willy-nilly (no matter how well-intentioned) and take over a state's activities in a situation like this. The federal resources could not be deployed until requested by the state; that's why, whenever there is a huge natural disaster, a governor has to petition that his/her state (or portion thereof) be declared such before Federal dollars/help can roll in, even when the entire country can see it's a disaster area. Maybe I've been suckered in by spinners, but from what I've seen on news reports, TPTB in Louisiana took a day or so to evaluate the situation before asking for help.
But then there's a little voice in my head that says the Navy ships (for example) could have been deployed from here just in case and therefore been there a little sooner ("Hey, why don't we go do some practice drills in the Gulf?").
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: [QUOTE] However, when people, long before the facts are in, unfairly attack my country ("Can This Actually Be Happening in America?"), I feel no responsbility to wait until all facts are known to respond.
Criticizing the response to the disaster is the same as "unfairly attack[ing] my country"? Then just about everyone on the line at my bank this morning must be a potential subversive.
-------------------- pat "Megadittoes Rush" young
THUMP, THUMP, THUMP Posts: 5442 | From: New York | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: [QUOTE] However, when people, long before the facts are in, unfairly attack my country ("Can This Actually Be Happening in America?"), I feel no responsbility to wait until all facts are known to respond.
Criticizing the response to the disaster is the same as "unfairly attack[ing] my country"? Then just about everyone on the line at my bank this morning must be a potential subversive.
Yea, those people in blue state bank lines ought to be rounded up and sent to a nice big ol' concentration corral in Oklahoma.
No, I do not think that. And I didn't accuse my follow snopesians, or those who agree with them, of being subversives.
-------------------- "Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?" Julius Lester Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg: Originally posted by Chloe: Does it occur to you that such people may well have plenty of friends, but that are communities in which owning a car is not the norm?
quote: Are you saying that the fleet of automobiles in some residential New Orleans neighborhoods is too small to squeeze in all the residents in case of emergency evacuation?
Yes. I don't know how well you know N.O., but it is is a city with impressive public transport, and unimpressive numbers of parking lots. For many people, a car is just not necessary enough to justify the expense. ETA: Since you bring up rural and coastal Mississippi, I'll add that public transportation on my travels there seemed almost non-existent, but that parking was generally not a problem.
quote: If the former -- physicially, not enough cars -- more of a government role is indeed needed. I just tried to google on car ownership rates and failed to find anything that would decide this question.
The number of cars in itself will mean little. Lots of families have multiple vehicles.
quote: The subject of whether avoiding grating on liberal sensibilities is good for the poor is indeed a big and important one, too big to get into here.
Trust me, Steve; it's not poor people who are grating on my "liberal sensibilities."
-------------------- ~~Ai am in mai prrrrrraime!~~ Posts: 10111 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Drummk: Personally I was somewhat surprised at the reaction of the government. Given the size of the US army and air force, both renowned for fast deployment times when necessary, it seems amazing that the situation in New Orleans was allowed to deteriorate, with policemen and national guardsmen pressed into unfamilar peacekeeping roles. The behaviour of the mayor and governor, however frustrated they might be, is also shocking. Cursing during an interview shows a total lack of self-control, and declaring war on looters and boasting about the killing ability of the soldiers dispatched to New Orleans to quell riots seems likely to exacerbate the situation rather than defuse it. All in all, the reactions of the federal and national governments have not been impressive. The entire gulf coast is in complete chaos; I find it impossible to believe that a country as rich, powerful and technologically proficient as the USA could not have averted the majority of this disaster.
But America is a republic, and the government cannot just go running in willy-nilly (no matter how well-intentioned) and take over a state's activities in a situation like this. The federal resources could not be deployed until requested by the state; that's why, whenever there is a huge natural disaster, a governor has to petition that his/her state (or portion thereof) be declared such before Federal dollars/help can roll in, even when the entire country can see it's a disaster area. Maybe I've been suckered in by spinners, but from what I've seen on news reports, TPTB in Louisiana took a day or so to evaluate the situation before asking for help.
Our media reported on 28 August that Bush had already declared a state of emergency in anticipation before the hurricane even hit. But even if he hadn't, the reaction from anyone who was told that people can't be rescued yet because the proper request forms haven't been filled in from the State and local governments, should (and would in Australia) have been "NFBSK the forms, just get those people out BEFORE they start dehydrating and anarchy erupts, and we'll worry about fixing up the legalities afterwards!"
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
