Someone forwarded a message from an out of touch member to a mailing list I'm on, which contained this drivel:
our worst fears have been realized; our wonderful madcap city is being pummeled and brought up short by the end result of being ignored by our city, state and federal governments for 300 years. Levee breaks? who would have guessed? (anyone who lives here is the short answer). ... My family has been in LA since the 1760's and ain't leaving now...Emphasis added.
WTF? WTFH? Please standby as we send a rocket-propelled GPS clue-by-four to assist you in your time of (mentally defecient) need. How about the result of 300 years of ignorance? Sticking your collective heads in the sand, covering your ears and repeating "Na na na I can't hear you"?
See the graphic at the bottom of http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4207202.stm Oh wait, you were aware it was an eventuality and are still surprised? Nuts to you then.
Are you mad at the people of New Orleans for staying in the path of disaster? Then you should also be mad at the people of San Francisco for living on top of a fault line, and the people of New York for living so close to an obvious terrorist target.
Are you considering that the people who could have afforded to get out had already done so? That some of the people who were caught in the disaster may have done so by choice (some who decided to stick around for whatever odd reason), but that a great number stayed because of lack of choice (couldn't afford the gas to move out, for example)?
Do you think it's unreasonable for people in NO to expect that even when disaster struck, they could depend on help from all those tax dollars they spent? That they would be able to use the fruits of what they paid the government for the greater good?
It really bothers me when people try to reduce a life decision -- like where to live when you have limited means -- to a simple equation. But here's an example of what I'm trying to tell you:
It's not that simple. Think about it.if ($self->location->dangerous)
{
$self->move('elsewhere');
}
Undefined subroutine &Person::move called at...
Re:Not as simple as you think
belg4mit on 2005-09-02T20:45:09
No, because I don't care about the immediate relief aspect of it per se. I realize the poor may not have all been able to flee on the spur of the moment. OTOH my point is they do not in fact have to be there. I knew someone would make bogus comparisons to earthquakes (and the NYC comparison is even further off the mark). Yes, earthquakes are a known risk. OTOH you can build for them. You can build for them indvidually and are not reliant about municipal or federal public works (of course having code requirements helps). Furthermore an earthquake, volcanic eruption, etc. is not
forecastable in anywhere near the same manner. Did you bother looking at the picture? Below sea-level between three large bodies of water! Scifi authors have written all sorts of stories about this fer cryin' out loud. If and when seismic and other events are no longer "random", then yes living on an active fault in a straw hut will get you what you deserve. As for the freaks who stuck around willingly, they should have no problem sleeping in the bed they made. FWIW gas is a bit cheaper in the South (for the same reason severyone is bellyaching that prices will now rise even to higher to "unamerican/ungodly heights"); although according to the DOE not as much as it was during my last cross-country drive (about 60-80 cents less). There are also things called bicycles, feet, and carpooling if they were truly interested in getting out. An "all those tax doallars spent" is a bad argument. I certainly don't advocate for only getting what you pay in from the government, but you can't have it both ways: dirt poor and government cash cow.Re:Not as simple as you think
VSarkiss on 2005-09-02T21:41:38
You're still paraphrasing "let them eat cake". As I said, think about it.
Re:Not as simple as you think
runrig on 2005-09-02T23:20:01
As far as living below sea level, I thought I'd google for "New Orleans" and "Netherlands" to see what popped up. The most interesting thing IMO was in this article about where the money for the levees went and the first reply (similar to your opinion) which spawned many more replies. I have no point to make at the moment.Re:Not as simple as you think
sigzero on 2005-09-03T04:50:24
I don't think money would have mattered. The levees were only strong enough to withstand a cat3 hurricane and there were no plans for a cat5, money or no money.
If you live on the coast, below see level, in a bowl, something sometime is bound to happen and it did.
Re:Not as simple as you think
rjbs on 2005-09-03T14:23:02
Scifi authors have written all sorts of stories about this fer cryin' out loud.
You lose.Re:Not as simple as you think
belg4mit on 2005-09-03T19:00:44
That's insightful.Re:Not as simple as you think
Stevan on 2005-09-04T01:36:49
I realize the poor may not have all been able to flee on the spur of the moment. OTOH my point is they do not in fact have to be there.I am sorry, but this is just not true. In all likelyness, the "poor" probably cannot flee at any moment, no matter how much warning they are given.
When you are poor, when your family is poor, when you parents are poor, when poverty goes back generations in your family, you do not have the same choices as people who are more well off might have. You cannot just pick up and move to some other place. If all the money you have goes towards putting food on the table, where are you going to get the money to move to another city/town/state? Moving costs money, and moving a family cost's even more money. And it is not so simple to just get up and leave an entire support network of friends and family and move.
Do not for one second think that most of the people left behind made the choice to do so. Many of those people just did not have the means (read: money) to make any choice.
- Stevan
