PDA

View Full Version : What Katrina proves to the conservative


SBK
09-06-2005, 06:51 PM
Watching this absolute failure take place really illustrates a point.

NEVER TRUST THE GOV'T TO TAKE CARE OF YOU.

The Gov'ts job isn't to evacuate, or hold your hand and help you leave a city with a cat 5 bullseye on it.

I've heard the arguement that if this took place in an affulent area would we see the same thing happen? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Affulent folks don't wait around for the gov't to house, feed, protect and provide for them. They go out and get it done. They see a cat 5 coming, they heed warning and leave. That's not a white/black, issue, it's a entitlement/do it yourself issue.

Go ahead, let me have it.

memyselfI
09-06-2005, 07:48 PM
Watching this absolute failure take place really illustrates a point.

NEVER TRUST THE GOV'T TO TAKE CARE OF YOU.

The Gov'ts job isn't to evacuate, or hold your hand and help you leave a city with a cat 5 bullseye on it.

I've heard the arguement that if this took place in an affulent area would we see the same thing happen? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Affulent folks don't wait around for the gov't to house, feed, protect and provide for them. They go out and get it done. They see a cat 5 coming, they heed warning and leave. That's not a white/black, issue, it's a entitlement/do it yourself issue.

Go ahead, let me have it.

So you undoubtedly felt the same way after 9/11 when the goverment and FEMA helped the victims recover. Basically, anyone who could evacuate the buildings saved themselves and those who could not only have themselves to blame because they couldn't get out fast enough or stayed behind and waited to be rescued? They should not have relied on the fire department, police, or anyone in the federal government to assist them?

chief99
09-06-2005, 08:18 PM
Not fair to compare to 9-11. Hurricane gave ample warning. These people weren't listening and some had money too.

Just a huge gray area to debate.

memyselfI
09-06-2005, 08:27 PM
Not fair to compare to 9-11. Hurricane gave ample warning. These people weren't listening and some had money too.

Just a huge gray area to debate.

Which is all the more reason why the ineffectiveness and incompetence of the federal response is so shocking. But to the point you are making, are you insinuating that if it's a sudden and terror disaster then it's A-OK to seek government assistance but if it's a natural disaster that you have a couple of days warning before then it's not?

:hmmm: :rolleyes:

unlurking
09-06-2005, 08:48 PM
Which is all the more reason why the ineffectiveness and incompetence of the federal response is so shocking. But to the point you are making, are you insinuating that if it's a sudden and terror disaster then it's A-OK to seek government assistance but if it's a natural disaster that you have a couple of days warning before then it's not?

:hmmm: :rolleyes:
If Bin Laden said he was planning on hitting NO on a Tuesday, I guarantee I would not be there. So YES, forewarning does play a part.

At the same time, I do agree that FEMA being run by DHS (Dumber Half of Stupidity) is a problem, and that would be Bush's fault. Also, the appointment of the FEMA director who is obviously inexperienced id also Bush's fault. I also lay blame on the local government for pre-hurricane bungling. And yes, those who had the means to evacuate but did not made their own bed.

memyselfI
09-06-2005, 08:51 PM
If Bin Laden said he was planning on hitting NO on a Tuesday, I guarantee I would not be there. So YES, forewarning does play a part.

At the same time, I do agree that FEMA being run by DHS (Dumber Half of Stupidity) is a problem, and that would be Bush's fault. Also, the appointment of the FEMA director who is obviously inexperienced id also Bush's fault. I also lay blame on the local government for pre-hurricane bungling. And yes, those who had the means to evacuate but did not made their own bed.

All you have said here is completely fair and reasonable. The only problem I have is trying to understand the empathy for those who could not evacuate for a terror attack and the lack of for those who could not in a mother nature attack... :hmmm:

whoman69
09-06-2005, 09:01 PM
In some of the areas effected, 40% of the people fall below the poverty line. Add to that sick and elderly. There was no way those people could evacuate. That said, it doesn't take 5 days to finally get them food or to rescue them from danger. Where was the response?

unlurking
09-06-2005, 09:35 PM
All you have said here is completely fair and reasonable. The only problem I have is trying to understand the empathy for those who could not evacuate for a terror attack and the lack of for those who could not in a mother nature attack... :hmmm:
Well the solution to that problem would have been the National Guard, of which SEVERAL thousand units were available, under DIRECT command of LA government. Pre-disaster bungling is 100% on the hands of local officials. I do agree that post-disaster bungling by FEMA is sad, but you cannot excuse the first line of defense.

Adept Havelock
09-06-2005, 09:47 PM
Well the solution to that problem would have been the National Guard, of which SEVERAL thousand units were available, under DIRECT command of LA government. Pre-disaster bungling is 100% on the hands of local officials. I do agree that post-disaster bungling by FEMA is sad, but you cannot excuse the first line of defense.

Exactly how do 4-5000 LAARNG troops equal "thousands of units"? :hmmm:

I find it interesting, and a bit pathetic, that you want to blame everyone else, except the man who sits in the office where, at least according to Harry S. Truman, The Buck is supposed to stop. There is plenty of blame at ALL levels to go around, and believe me, it will.

The Mayor, I believe, screwed up not using the buses to help evac.

The Gov. should have coordinated better with the other states.

However, FEMA's response before Katrina hit is every bit as much at fault, at least according to DHS (Now FEMA's boss) documents available at their govt. website (they don't have to wait on the state...).

Sorry, but Bush is just as culpable as the others I've mentioned, if not more, for appointing a political hack with NO disaster relief experience, and extremely limited experience as an executive administrator to head the Nations premiere disaster relief organization.


That, and the inconvienince his Photo-Ops cause those trying to conduct rescue and recovery. The last thing these people need right now are the security headaches that go with a presidential visit. He can give speechs and tell Chertoff and Brown how great a job they are doing just as well from the White House.

JMO.

SBK
09-06-2005, 09:56 PM
So you undoubtedly felt the same way after 9/11 when the goverment and FEMA helped the victims recover. Basically, anyone who could evacuate the buildings saved themselves and those who could not only have themselves to blame because they couldn't get out fast enough or stayed behind and waited to be rescued? They should not have relied on the fire department, police, or anyone in the federal government to assist them?

Nope. The folks there didn't have several days of the news screaming about a cat 5, leave cause you live below sea level. Totally different circumstances.

SBK
09-06-2005, 09:57 PM
All you have said here is completely fair and reasonable. The only problem I have is trying to understand the empathy for those who could not evacuate for a terror attack and the lack of for those who could not in a mother nature attack... :hmmm:

Terror = no warning
Cat 5 Monster = several days warning

Again, I saw lots of folks looting on tv, don't tell me they had no way to get out.

SBK
09-06-2005, 09:58 PM
In some of the areas effected, 40% of the people fall below the poverty line. Add to that sick and elderly. There was no way those people could evacuate. That said, it doesn't take 5 days to finally get them food or to rescue them from danger. Where was the response?

People below the poverty line = no way to get out? That's a big assumption.

I do agree 5 days is quite a long time to get supplies in. Too long, but just cause someones poor doesn't mean they can't walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge.

Adept Havelock
09-06-2005, 10:13 PM
People below the poverty line = no way to get out? That's a big assumption.

I do agree 5 days is quite a long time to get supplies in. Too long, but just cause someones poor doesn't mean they can't walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge.

I'm sick of moonbats/wingnuts saying Bush is trying Genocide, or that Bush has done no wrong.

This led me to do just a little math.

New Orleans, approx. pop. 500,000.

40% poverty level or below-200,000.

Assume 1/2 got out(I admit a guess, but it seems reasonable)- 100,000.

Buses, that if used, could have taken 15,000 out of NO. Assume time for 2 trips out of storm area before Katrina impact (several hundred miles each way)-however, these were not used, sadly. The Mayor has some tough questions to answer.-could have saved 30,000 leaving 70,000.
(My figures on the buses come from a reliable conservative poster on TalkLeft-he posts as James Robertson)
70,000 people, assuming all the infirm were taken out.
70,000 to walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge, as you so blithely put it.
70,000 to get several hundred miles, with no resources largely because they could afford little, before the worst storm in decades caught them on the roads.

In reality, those 30,000 that the city could have moved are hypothetical, because the Mayor/Council dropped the ball. And that's all.


BULLSH*T!

If the richest, most powerful nation in the world can't do better than that, then we as a nation should demand WHY NOT!! Politics be damned! A lot of heads should roll because of this debacle, and the resident of the Oval Office is no less culpable than the Mayor/Council of NO, and the state govt.

After all, he put a political hack in charge of FEMA.

SBK
09-06-2005, 10:19 PM
I'm sick of moonbats/wingnuts saying Bush is trying Genocide, or that Bush has done no wrong.

This led me to do just a little math.

New Orleans, approx. pop. 500,000.

40% poverty level or below-200,000.

Assume 1/2 got out(I admit a guess, but it seems reasonable)- 100,000.

Buses, that if used, could have taken 15,000 out of NO. Assume time for 2 trips out of storm area before Katrina impact (several hundred miled each way)-however, these were not used, sadly. The Mayor has some tough questions to ask.-could have saved 30,000 leaving 70,000.
(My figures on the buses come from a reliable conservative poster on TalkLeft-he as James Robertson)
70,000 people, assuming all the infirm were taken out.
70,000 to walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge, as you so blithely put it.
70,000 to get several hundred miles, with no resources largely because they could afford little, before the worst storm in decades caught them on the roads.

In reality, those 30,000 that the city could have moved are hypothetical, because the Mayor/Council dropped the ball. And that's all.


BULLSH*T!

If the richest, most powerful nation in the world can't do better than that, then we as a nation should demand WHY NOT!! Politics be damned! A lot of heads should roll because of this debacle, and the ressident of the Oval Office is no less culpable than the Mayor/Council of NO, and the state govt.

After all, he put a political hack in charge of FEMA.

My math tells me that our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves with the entitlement mentality this nation has. If you can't figure out how to save your family from dying, with several days notice.....good grief. (I know there are exceptions, but all those folks that didn't leave aren't handicapped)

SBK
09-06-2005, 10:19 PM
My math tells me that our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves with the entitlement mentality this nation has. If you can't figure out how to save your family from dying, with several days notice.....good grief. (I know there are exceptions, but all those folks that didn't leave aren't handicapped)

By the way, I never said Bush has done no wrong.

unlurking
09-06-2005, 10:21 PM
Exactly how do 4-5000 LAARNG troops equal "thousands of units"? :hmmm:

I find it interesting, and a bit pathetic, that you want to blame everyone else, except the man who sits in the office where, at least according to Harry S. Truman, The Buck is supposed to stop. There is plenty of blame at ALL levels to go around, and believe me, it will.

The Mayor, I believe, screwed up not using the buses to help evac.

The Gov. should have coordinated better with the other states.

However, FEMA's response before Katrina hit is every bit as much at fault, at least according to DHS (Now FEMA's boss) documents available at their govt. website (they don't have to wait on the state...).

Sorry, but Bush is just as culpable as the others I've mentioned, if not more, for appointing a political hack with NO disaster relief experience, and extremely limited experience as an executive administrator to head the Nations premiere disaster relief organization.


That, and the inconvienince his Photo-Ops cause those trying to conduct rescue and recovery. The last thing these people need right now are the security headaches that go with a presidential visit. He can give speechs and tell Chertoff and Brown how great a job they are doing just as well from the White House.

JMO.

Hey dumbass, if you read any of my other posts you would no that I HATE Bush. I have also stated in these threads that FEMA bungling has been a joke. Don't put me in the group of Bush apologists, or you just show your own stupidity.

What you are failing to see is that the LOCAL F*CKING GOV could have been prepared, and had ALL THE POWER THEY NEEDED to call up thousands of troops to manage evacuations. THEY DID NOT!!!!!!!!

Bush should be removed from office for NUMEROUS attacks on on citizems rights, pansdering to religious whackos, coffer filling of buddies, etc.; however the blame for the DEATH TOLL of this hurricane rest PRIMARILY on the shoulder of local retards in LA.

F*ck the "buses". Where were the "4-5000" (units as in soldiers, maybe not military parlance, but pawn components) PRIOR to the hurricane? WHO commanded those "soldier" before the federal government became involved?

F*ck Bush and "Big Brother". Where is the "we take care of our own" attitude that would have saved lives BEFORE the hurricane hit land.

Again, as I have already said, FEMA under Bush's crony and DHS is a joke. Unfortunately, the jokes in LA never got the punch line and were too stupid to manage THEIR OWN concerns. I am a federalist, and believe whole heartedly in the state's responsibility to take care of its citizens from all threats, INCLUDING the federal government.

Adept Havelock
09-06-2005, 10:25 PM
Sorry, I don't think it's an "entitlement" mentality in a Federal system to think one of governments' primary tasks is evacuation/protection/relief in the event of a catastrophic national disaster or war.

And if you think the founding fathers would disagree with that sentiment, I'd love to see you make a legitimate case for it. Failing that, you remain a soundbite.

Adept Havelock
09-06-2005, 10:28 PM
Hey dumbass..........INCLUDING the federal government.

Mea' Culpa. Your perjoratives nonwithstanding, I offer my sincere apologies. I had simply reached my limit in seeing the moonbat/wingnuts spinning this tragedy, and apparently misread part of your posts.

Again, my apologies.

SBK
09-06-2005, 10:28 PM
Sorry, I don't think it's an "entitlement" mentality in a Federal system to think one of governments' primary tasks is evacuation/protection/relief in the event of a catastrophic national disaster or war.

And if you think the founding fathers would disagree with that sentiment, I'd love to see you make a legitimate case for it. Failing that, you remain a soundbite.

If the founding fathers waited on gov't there wouldn't be any USA. We'd still be England, doucebag.

And it is an entitlement mentality if you can't save your family from impending doom yourself, instead thinking the gov't has to come round you up and protect you from mother nature.

unlurking
09-06-2005, 10:37 PM
Mea' Culpa. Your perjoratives nonwithstanding, I offer my sincere apologies. I had simply reached my limit in seeing the moonbat/wingnuts spinning this tragedy, and apparently misread part of your posts.

Again, my apologies.
Sorry.

Should not have resorted to name calling, and showed my own stupidity on that one.

I hate Bush with a passion, and saw red with being grouped with a Bush supporter. He represents all that I feel is corrupt with politics.

No matter how FEMA screws this one up (thanks to being placed under DHS and an incompetent crony), I still feel that the local government really failed their citizens. As a person who believes strongly in the right of citizens to govern themselves through local institutions (I hate big bro), this really hurts my message that localalized governments knows what is best for their citizens (in comparison to federal government).

Adept Havelock
09-06-2005, 10:40 PM
If the founding fathers waited on gov't there wouldn't be any USA. We'd still be England, doucebag.

And it is an entitlement mentality if you can't save your family from impending doom yourself, instead thinking the gov't has to come round you up and protect you from mother nature.


Hmm. I fail to see what the American Revolution has to do with the duty of government in a Federal System (something in the constitution about providing for the general welfare (not the perversion of the term as applied to govt. payments) and the common defense) to assist in Disaster relief, but I also see you are under the illusion we at some time were "England". As I recall, England controlled us, several, thirteen I believe independent colonies. That was the problem, and why we revolted. Were we "England", I guess we would have revolted against ourselves? Hmmm. Interesting thinking, I guess.

While I do frequently function as one in the throes of passion, I am not, technically, a douchebag. However, seeing how you have no problem coldly condemming 70,000 people to whatever fate brings (and God knows how many more if your mentality were applied to say, a city that had been exposed to Smallpox), I'll not concern myself with your childish namecalling.

Yes, people should help themselves. And government should help those that are unable to help themselves in the face of Forseeable Natural Disaster.

You obviously aren't interested in a reasonable discussion, simply issuing soundbites. I bid you all a good night.

SBK
09-06-2005, 10:56 PM
Hmm. I fail to see what the American Revolution has to do with the duty of government in a Federal System (something in the constitution about providing for the general welfare (not the perversion of the term as applied to govt. payments) and the common defense) to assist in Disaster relief, but I also see you are under the illusion we at some time were "England". As I recall, England controlled us, several, thirteen I believe independent colonies. That was the problem, and why we revolted. Were we "England", I guess we would have revolted against ourselves? Hmmm. Interesting thinking, I guess.

While I do frequently function as one in the throes of passion, I am not, technically, a douchebag. However, seeing how you have no problem coldly condemming 70,000 people to whatever fate brings (and God knows how many more if your mentality were applied to say, a city that had been exposed to Smallpox), I'll not concern myself with your childish namecalling.

Yes, people should help themselves. And government should help those that are unable to help themselves in the face of Forseeable Natural Disaster.

You obviously aren't interested in a reasonable discussion, simply issuing soundbites. I bid you all a good night.

You missed my point. Totally. Enjoy your evening.

SBK
09-06-2005, 10:57 PM
Sorry.

No matter how FEMA screws this one up (thanks to being placed under DHS and an incompetent crony), I still feel that the local government really failed their citizens. As a person who believes strongly in the right of citizens to govern themselves through local institutions (I hate big bro), this really hurts my message that localalized governments knows what is best for their citizens (in comparison to federal government).

Good take. :clap:

Logical
09-06-2005, 11:19 PM
Watching this absolute failure take place really illustrates a point.

NEVER TRUST THE GOV'T TO TAKE CARE OF YOU.

The Gov'ts job isn't to evacuate, or hold your hand and help you leave a city with a cat 5 bullseye on it.

I've heard the arguement that if this took place in an affulent area would we see the same thing happen? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Affulent folks don't wait around for the gov't to house, feed, protect and provide for them. They go out and get it done. They see a cat 5 coming, they heed warning and leave. That's not a white/black, issue, it's a entitlement/do it yourself issue.

Go ahead, let me have it.

I will just say that you evidently have no idea just how poor many of these people were. Leaving without government assistance likely was impossible. Further they likely had no place to go.

Imagine you literally have no money.
Imagine you are alone in the world no close relatives.
Imagine you own no transportation.
Imagine you have no credit.

Now imagine how much you need help to uproot yourself for what looked like would be a minimum of weeks even before it hit. Play it again sam.

Logical
09-06-2005, 11:24 PM
People below the poverty line = no way to get out? That's a big assumption.

I do agree 5 days is quite a long time to get supplies in. Too long, but just cause someones poor doesn't mean they can't walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge.Obviously you did not watch the rescues many of those people were unable to walk unassisted, many required mobility devices like wheelchairs, oomf play it again sam.

WoodDraw
09-07-2005, 12:14 AM
I will just say that you evidently have no idea just how poor many of these people were. Leaving without government assistance likely was impossible. Further they likely had no place to go.

Imagine you literally have no money.
Imagine you are alone in the world no close relatives.
Imagine you own no transportation.
Imagine you have no credit.

Now imagine how much you need help to uproot yourself for what looked like would be a minimum of weeks even before it hit. Play it again sam.

Exactly.

How do you get out of the city if you have no car, no money, and there is no mass transit? And if you do make it out of the city, how are you supposed to provide for your family when your job was just destroyed along with all of your possesions?

The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens when extraordinary circumstances arise. How else are they to survive when the needed infrastructure completely collapses around them?

NewChief
09-07-2005, 04:17 AM
People below the poverty line = no way to get out? That's a big assumption.

I do agree 5 days is quite a long time to get supplies in. Too long, but just cause someones poor doesn't mean they can't walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge.

Your complete inability to even attempt to understand someone else's situation and why people wouldn't leave is very telling.

Let's see:
1) hit the open road (walking) with barely a penny to my name with my entire family in tow, hoping that someone will take care of us, because we don't have any disposable income
2) stay here at home with my family, friends, and neighbors surrounding us in our house and hope that the hurricane misses us and all the hoopla is overblown like it has been in the past.

Saggysack
09-07-2005, 04:42 AM
Some people will never understand the decisions of the destitute.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 09:00 AM
Some people will never understand the decisions of the destitute.

There's a pretty good educational theorist named Ruby Payne who has written out some cool "rules of the generationally impoverished." While a lot of her work is patronizing and encourages labeling/stereotyping, she does make some interesting observations about the impoverished. One of those rules is focus on the immediate instead of the long term. I think this is particularly apt here.

Here are a few of the other "rules" according to this chart.

*The driving forces for decision making are survival, relationships, and entertainment.
*The "world" is defined in local terms.
*Destiny and fate govern. The notion of having choices is foreign. Discipline is about penance and forgiveness, not change.
*Tools are often not available. Therefore, the concept of repair and fixing may not be present.

Brock
09-07-2005, 09:04 AM
Obviously you did not watch the rescues many of those people were unable to walk unassisted, many required mobility devices like wheelchairs, oomf play it again sam.

I also saw plenty of them who looked as though they could have easily walked 20 miles per day. After the hurricane, there is no excuse for most of those people staying where they were. Would you have stayed, whether you had a dime in your pocket or not?

Uatu
09-07-2005, 09:30 AM
Who doesn't:
-Have a few bucks for bus fare
-Know anyone else with any form of transportation
-Own something basic such as a bicycle
-Have two feet good for walking

Yeah, it's easy to say "oh the poor people couldn't leave", but the reality is that most probably just underestimated the storm and thought it would be easier crash at the superdome for a couple of days and then go back home.

If you're able bodied, you probably could have got out of town if you had really tried.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 09:40 AM
Who doesn't:
-Have a few bucks for bus fare
-Know anyone else with any form of transportation
-Own something basic such as a bicycle
-Have two feet good for walking


You make it sound so easy. You want them to pull a Forest Gump and walk and just keep walking? Leaving your home requires more than just walking away or getting a few bucks for bus fare. You've got to be able to pay for food on the road. You've got to be able to pay for hotel rooms. I do agree that many probably thought it was an unnecessary inconvenience to leave their homes, but it's not about having a few bucks stashed away. Why don't you leave your home for a week with $20 and see how you do. Oh. Be sure to take along three or four kids and a grandparent or three as well. Maybe a baby for good measure.

Brock
09-07-2005, 09:59 AM
You make it sound so easy. You want them to pull a Forest Gump and walk and just keep walking? Leaving your home requires more than just walking away or getting a few bucks for bus fare. You've got to be able to pay for food on the road. You've got to be able to pay for hotel rooms. I do agree that many probably thought it was an unnecessary inconvenience to leave their homes, but it's not about having a few bucks stashed away. Why don't you leave your home for a week with $20 and see how you do. Oh. Be sure to take along three or four kids and a grandparent or three as well. Maybe a baby for good measure.

so your contention is, sitting and waiting around under the worst possible conditions is better than gambling on something that couldn't help but be better up the road a few miles? I am NOT talking about those that couldn't leave for whatever reason. I am talking about those who easily could have. Your notion that it requires money is ridiculous. What good would money do anybody in that aftermath?

PS, this is in reference to those people who were "stranded" at the Superdome.

SBK
09-07-2005, 10:00 AM
Your complete inability to even attempt to understand someone else's situation and why people wouldn't leave is very telling.

Let's see:
1) hit the open road (walking) with barely a penny to my name with my entire family in tow, hoping that someone will take care of us, because we don't have any disposable income
2) stay here at home with my family, friends, and neighbors surrounding us in our house and hope that the hurricane misses us and all the hoopla is overblown like it has been in the past.

This argument falls on deaf ears in Cuba and Mexico.

WHICH PROVES MY POINT.

People in those countries, (and this one in the beginning), don't wait around for the gov't to solve their problems. They want a safer, more productive life for their families, so they leave with whatever they have, which often times is nothing.

If I had nothing, and a cat 5 is headed my way, and I lived under sea level, I'd have figured something out. But that's just who I am.

SBK
09-07-2005, 10:02 AM
I will just say that you evidently have no idea just how poor many of these people were. Leaving without government assistance likely was impossible. Further they likely had no place to go.

Imagine you literally have no money.
Imagine you are alone in the world no close relatives.
Imagine you own no transportation.
Imagine you have no credit.

Now imagine how much you need help to uproot yourself for what looked like would be a minimum of weeks even before it hit. Play it again sam.

Imagine you live in Cuba. Imagine you live in Mexico. Those folks do it everyday.

The entitlement mentality has totally crippled New Orleans.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 10:04 AM
so your contention is, sitting and waiting around under the worst possible conditions is better than gambling on something that couldn't help but be better up the road a few miles? I am NOT talking about those that couldn't leave for whatever reason. I am talking about those who easily could have. Your notion that it requires money is ridiculous. What good would money do anybody in that aftermath?

I'm talking about prior to the hurricane, when people were evacuating.

Here's the scenario, as I would think an impoverished person would see it:

Leave our home, which we know and in which we feel secure, for the insecurity and unknown of the open road where we might not even be able to get a roof over the family's head? Besides, we've been warned about these things a ton of times, they always just pass us by. Leaving would really infringe on the bills this month, because we'd have to get a hotel room and stuff and we're barely getting by, so we'll just sit tight here and wait it out.

If you're talking about after the hurricane, then yeah. I'd say that some of those people should probably have just started walking.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 10:08 AM
This argument falls on deaf ears in Cuba and Mexico.

WHICH PROVES MY POINT.

People in those countries, (and this one in the beginning), don't wait around for the gov't to solve their problems. They want a safer, more productive life for their families, so they leave with whatever they have, which often times is nothing.


Umm, your Cuba and Mexico thing doesn't make any sense. Both of those countries have tons of impoverished people that are just as "trapped" in poverty as the impoverished of America. It's not like every single poor person in Cuba or Mexico is struggling mightily Horatio Alger style to make it work and Americans have now cornered the market on impoverished "laziness" (not the word I'd use, hence the quotes).


If I had nothing, and a cat 5 is headed my way, and I lived under sea level, I'd have figured something out. But that's just who I am.

Yes. That is what you'd do, due to the experiences that have shaped you. Other people have had different experiences and thus make different decisions. If we all responded to any given situation in the same way, we'd be lemmings not humans.

Brock
09-07-2005, 10:10 AM
If you're talking about after the hurricane, then yeah. I'd say that some of those people should probably have just started walking.

That's all I'm saying. I do understand some people not leaving before it hit, but I just don't understand the logic of standing around kneedeep in fecal matter and loudly complaining that the government hasn't showed up yet with a helicopter.

SBK
09-07-2005, 10:13 AM
Umm, your Cuba and Mexico thing doesn't make any sense. Both of those countries have tons of impoverished people that are just as "trapped" in poverty as the impoverished of America. It's not like every single poor person in Cuba or Mexico is struggling mightily Horatio Alger style to make it work and Americans have now cornered the market on impoverished "laziness" (not the word I'd use, hence the quotes).



Yes. That is what you'd do, due to the experiences that have shaped you. Other people have had different experiences and thus make different decisions. If we all responded to any given situation in the same way, we'd be lemmings not humans.

You wouldn't contend that the poor folks in New Orleans don't feel "trapped" in poverty.

I was pointing out that thousands of dirt poor folks find a way to immigrate here every year. They leave with nothing, hoping to find a better life.

The folks in NO that were able, but chose not too are all classified as too poor to leave. I think that take is lame. It can be done, and it should be done if you need to protect your family.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 10:14 AM
That's all I'm saying. I do understand some people not leaving before it hit, but I just don't understand the logic of standing around kneedeep in fecal matter and loudly complaining that the government hasn't showed up yet with a helicopter.

Yeah. I don't know. Some of the newscasts (the infamous Geraldo and Shep Smith specifically) made it look like they had some of the bridges out of the city checkpointed so that people couldn't leave, but I've also heard of other people walking out.

I'd probably walk out, though I don't know. I'm pretty weird. I'd be tempted to hang around and check out the city, probably shooting video and writing as much as possible while living survivalist style. It's a pretty interesting scenario down there that we hopefully won't see the like of again.

NewChief
09-07-2005, 10:18 AM
You wouldn't contend that the poor folks in New Orleans don't feel "trapped" in poverty.

I was pointing out that thousands of dirt poor folks find a way to immigrate here every year. They leave with nothing, hoping to find a better life.

The folks in NO that were able, but chose not too are all classified as too poor to leave. I think that take is lame. It can be done, and it should be done if you need to protect your family.

That's a really poor analogy. People leave Mexico and Cuba because they're leaving for a place they see as the promised land. They've been sold on the American Dream, and they're convinced that they're going to get rich and wealthy in America. People in NO are leaving insecurity for more insecurity.

jcl-kcfan2
09-07-2005, 10:19 AM
In some of the areas effected, 40% of the people fall below the poverty line. Add to that sick and elderly. There was no way those people could evacuate. That said, it doesn't take 5 days to finally get them food or to rescue them from danger. Where was the response?


How long does it take, and provide some of your data to arrive at this conclusion please.

Not just "well, uugghhh... I think it should be faster..."

jcl-kcfan2
09-07-2005, 10:21 AM
People below the poverty line = no way to get out? That's a big assumption.

I do agree 5 days is quite a long time to get supplies in. Too long, but just cause someones poor doesn't mean they can't walk/drive/bike/hitch a ride out of dodge.


It hadn't been 5 days before supplies began landing.

Brock
09-07-2005, 10:23 AM
That's a really poor analogy. People leave Mexico and Cuba because they're leaving for a place they see as the promised land. They've been sold on the American Dream, and they're convinced that they're going to get rich and wealthy in America. People in NO are leaving insecurity for more insecurity.

I don't think so. I think people leave those places for freedom, something that most people don't value unless they don't have it.

jcl-kcfan2
09-07-2005, 10:25 AM
I will just say that you evidently have no idea just how poor many of these people were. Leaving without government assistance likely was impossible. Further they likely had no place to go.

Imagine you literally have no money.
Imagine you are alone in the world no close relatives.
Imagine you own no transportation.
Imagine you have no credit.

Now imagine how much you need help to uproot yourself for what looked like would be a minimum of weeks even before it hit. Play it again sam.


Imagine getting a freaking job instead of being on the dole your whole life.... imagine

jcl-kcfan2
09-07-2005, 10:28 AM
Obviously you did not watch the rescues many of those people were unable to walk unassisted, many required mobility devices like wheelchairs, oomf play it again sam.


Many = just how many???

jcl-kcfan2
09-07-2005, 10:30 AM
Your complete inability to even attempt to understand someone else's situation and why people wouldn't leave is very telling.

Let's see:
1) hit the open road (walking) with barely a penny to my name with my entire family in tow, hoping that someone will take care of us, because we don't have any disposable income
2) stay here at home with my family, friends, and neighbors surrounding us in our house and hope that the hurricane misses us and all the hoopla is overblown like it has been in the past.


The question you seem to be missing is...

Why are these people living there for YEARS with no money?

Because they DEPEND on the gov't to take care of everything for them.

20% of the population cannot climb out of poverty, I don't believe it.

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 10:31 AM
I will just say that you evidently have no idea just how poor many of these people were. Leaving without government assistance likely was impossible. Further they likely had no place to go.

Imagine you literally have no money.
Imagine you are alone in the world no close relatives.
Imagine you own no transportation.
Imagine you have no credit.

Now imagine how much you need help to uproot yourself for what looked like would be a minimum of weeks even before it hit. Play it again sam.

Exactly.

How do you get out of the city if you have no car, no money, and there is no mass transit? And if you do make it out of the city, how are you supposed to provide for your family when your job was just destroyed along with all of your possesions?

The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens when extraordinary circumstances arise. How else are they to survive when the needed infrastructure completely collapses around them?

All of that beats dying and/or having my kids wind up with some fatal disease. That's a no brainer for anyone that has any ability or desire to take care of themself.

gblowfish
09-07-2005, 10:36 AM
Bumper Sticker seen in San Fran:

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 10:41 AM
This is a usless argument. I'm seeing a bunch of people posting responses and giving their philosophy, when they don't know s**t. Unless you've been dirt poor, you honestly don't know what the f**k you're talking about. Most of those people couln't leave for reasons that were previously explained.

It's easy to Monday Morning Quarterback this tradgedy, especially when you are as priveliged as you are. Now, I might not know you and your economic situation, but if you are typing on a computer in your home or office right now, you are a hell of a lot more priveliged than a lot of the people that stayed down there in that mess. It was said that 1/3 of NO don't even own a car. If you are poor and can not afford a car, how the hell can you get out of town? Well of course most of you would say,"get a bus or plane ticket!!" And go where? If you don't have family far enough out of town, what's the use, you'll still be in the storm. So as you can see, most had to ride out the storm.

As far as your Cuba and Mexico argurment, a lot of those "poor" people die as a result of a hurricane as well.

memyselfI
09-07-2005, 10:41 AM
Bumper Sticker seen in San Fran:

:clap:

Brilliant!!!

memyselfI
09-07-2005, 10:43 AM
As far as your Cuba and Mexico argurment, a lot of those "poor" people die as a result of a hurricane as well.

Actually, Cuba has been cited by an agency at the UN that oversees disaster relief as a 'model' for hurricane evacuation.

More people died in the US in July 05 than did in Cuba when that poor country managed to evacuate 1.5 million people and 16 died. :hmmm:

Brock
09-07-2005, 10:44 AM
This is a usless argument. I'm seeing a bunch of people posting responses and giving their philosophy, when they don't know s**t. Unless you've been dirt poor, you honestly don't know what the f**k you're talking about. Most of those people couln't leave for reasons that were previously explained.

It's easy to Monday Morning Quarterback this tradgedy, especially when you are as priveliged as you are. Now, I might not know you and your economic situation, but if you are typing on a computer in your home or office right now, you are a hell of a lot more priveliged than a lot of the people that stayed down there in that mess. It was said that 1/3 of NO don't even own a car. If you are poor and can not afford a car, how the hell can you get out of town? Well of course most of you would say,"get a bus or plane ticket!!" And go where? If you don't have family far enough out of town, what's the use, you'll still be in the storm. So as you can see, most had to ride out the storm.

As far as your Cuba and Mexico argurment, a lot of those "poor" people die as a result of a hurricane as well.

You obviously aren't really reading what's being said, so you are right, it's a useless argument.

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 10:48 AM
You obviously aren't really reading what's being said, so you are right, it's a useless argument.

Maybe were reading it in a different light, please enlighten me.

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 11:01 AM
This is a usless argument. I'm seeing a bunch of people posting responses and giving their philosophy, when they don't know s**t. Unless you've been dirt poor, you honestly don't know what the f**k you're talking about. Most of those people couln't leave for reasons that were previously explained.

It's easy to Monday Morning Quarterback this tradgedy, especially when you are as priveliged as you are. Now, I might not know you and your economic situation, but if you are typing on a computer in your home or office right now, you are a hell of a lot more priveliged than a lot of the people that stayed down there in that mess. It was said that 1/3 of NO don't even own a car. If you are poor and can not afford a car, how the hell can you get out of town? Well of course most of you would say,"get a bus or plane ticket!!" And go where? If you don't have family far enough out of town, what's the use, you'll still be in the storm. So as you can see, most had to ride out the storm.

As far as your Cuba and Mexico argurment, a lot of those "poor" people die as a result of a hurricane as well.
I made less than welfare would have paid me for two years straight and managed to get from KC to Manhattan, KS and back. I didn't know anyone in Manhattan and I was unemployed at the time, but I managed to get there and get settled in. "It can't be done" is a pathetic excuse made by losers. The kind of loser that dies in a hurricane with days of advanced warning.

Now, children, people who were hospitalized, etc: Yeah we all failed them. Every f**king one of us. However the people that failed them the most were themselves, for electing boobs who were more concerned with getting them a handout than creating and enacting a decent evacuation plan.

SBK
09-07-2005, 11:09 AM
I made less than welfare would have paid me for two years straight and managed to get from KC to Manhattan, KS and back. I didn't know anyone in Manhattan and I was unemployed at the time, but I managed to get there and get settled in. "It can't be done" is a pathetic excuse made by losers. The kind of loser that dies in a hurricane with days of advanced warning.

Now, children, people who were hospitalized, etc: Yeah we all failed them. Every f**king one of us. However the people that failed them the most were themselves, for electing boobs who were more concerned with getting them a handout than creating and enacting a decent evacuation plan.

BINGO. Growing up my mom made $6 per month too much not to get welfare after my dad left. We were poor. Guess what, we made it, she eventually bought a house, and we always had food on the table. We made it cause she was forced to figure out how to make it happen. Welfare takes your brain away, and you no longer have to think because the gov't is supposed to make your problems go away.

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 11:44 AM
I made less than welfare would have paid me for two years straight and managed to get from KC to Manhattan, KS and back. I didn't know anyone in Manhattan and I was unemployed at the time, but I managed to get there and get settled in. "It can't be done" is a pathetic excuse made by losers. The kind of loser that dies in a hurricane with days of advanced warning.

Now, children, people who were hospitalized, etc: Yeah we all failed them. Every f**king one of us. However the people that failed them the most were themselves, for electing boobs who were more concerned with getting them a handout than creating and enacting a decent evacuation plan.

I've been there myself. Broke as s**t, can't pay anything, had my lights cut off, had my phone cut off, damn near had my gas cut off, but I still managed to make things happen for me and my wife and child. I was on unemployemt, but never welfare (too much pride), I've done many odd jobs, and worked at temp agencies. I know what it is to work hard and make ends meet, so I would never make an excuse for a lazy bastard that doesn't want to work.

But in that storm there was more than that. Like I said, some of those folks could not leave the area for more reasons than we know. To compare a trip from KC to Manhattan, KS is not like a trip from NO to Houston, or NO to KC, etc. Most of those folks probably make less than you made during your that time in your life.

What I'm saying is, for most of those people, we don't know there entire situation. As for some, I'm sure they were just waiting for an opportunity to cause havoc, but for most they most likely didn't have the means of escaping.

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 11:58 AM
BINGO. Growing up my mom made $6 per month too much not to get welfare after my dad left. We were poor. Guess what, we made it, she eventually bought a house, and we always had food on the table. We made it cause she was forced to figure out how to make it happen. Welfare takes your brain away, and you no longer have to think because the gov't is supposed to make your problems go away.

That's great, I am happy for you and your folks. But you can't assume that everyone that stayed was on welfare. But think back to when your mother was making the little amount she was making. Put yourself there and then add a cat 5 hurricane, now what? Maybe you have family you can go to, maybe you have friends you can go stay with. But what if you don't? You now have limited means of escaping the storm. What if you have no car and you are living check to check? What I am doing is throwing in variables. Do you remember algebra? You know how you start off with one equation, and solve it. Then you add in one extra variable. You solve it, but now it's alittle more difficult this time. Well, keep adding variables and you'll see my point

When I was growing up, I spent a lot of time in Southern Arkansas/Northern Louisiana. In the town my grandmother stayed in, it was very, very, very poor. Some of you wouldn't believe the house some people had to live in. Hell, some of them didn't have indoor plumbing until the 80's. Now unless they have family to go stay with, most of those folks can't just get up a leave town for an extended amount of time. These are the same people you are talking about. I say until you've met and interacted with people like this, you make the argument that you are trying to make.

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 12:02 PM
I've been there myself. Broke as s**t, can't pay anything, had my lights cut off, had my phone cut off, damn near had my gas cut off, but I still managed to make things happen for me and my wife and child. I was on unemployemt, but never welfare (too much pride), I've done many odd jobs, and worked at temp agencies. I know what it is to work hard and make ends meet, so I would never make an excuse for a lazy bastard that doesn't want to work.

But in that storm there was more than that. Like I said, some of those folks could not leave the area for more reasons than we know. To compare a trip from KC to Manhattan, KS is not like a trip from NO to Houston, or NO to KC, etc. Most of those folks probably make less than you made during your that time in your life.
I made less than $14k over that two year stretch, I'll bet most of them clear far more than that.

Second, let's identify how many of these "don't have anything" people owned or paid monthly for the following:

1. TV(s)
2. Stereo, DVD Players, etc
3. Cable/Satellite
4. Beer
5. Cigarettes
6. Junk Food/Fast Food
7. Designer Clothes
8. Jewelry

I've seen people buying better food with food stamps than I was buying with hard earned money. I can't think of the last "poor person" I've seen interviewed who didn't have at least two things from that list above in the camera shot and God only knows how many others out of view. We have an absurd notion in this country of what "poor" is and all too often we use that as an excuse for why stupid people do stupid things.

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 12:05 PM
You now have limited means of escaping the storm.
Notice the word you used, "limited". Not "no means of escaping", just "limited". They made a choice and paid for it. It's just too bad they took their kids with them in so many instances. Sadly, the kids that made it and lost their parents will probably have a better life and better prospects for the future now that they won't be tied to someone who's constantly thinking poor.

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 12:17 PM
I made less than $14k over that two year stretch, I'll bet most of them clear far more than that.

Second, let's identify how many of these "don't have anything" people owned or paid monthly for the following:

1. TV(s)
2. Stereo, DVD Players, etc
3. Cable/Satellite
4. Beer
5. Cigarettes
6. Junk Food/Fast Food
7. Designer Clothes
8. Jewelry

I've seen people buying better food with food stamps than I was buying with hard earned money. I can't think of the last "poor person" I've seen interviewed who didn't have at least two things from that list above in the camera shot and God only knows how many others out of view. We have an absurd notion in this country of what "poor" is and all too often we use that as an excuse for why stupid people do stupid things.

The fact of the matter is that some of these people make less than that!!! Just because you have a few of those items dosen't mean that you are not poor!!! Some of those items could have been given to them for they are very old.

The problem I am have is that you and shortbuskid lump everyone into the same categorie. Not everyone can do the exact same thing at the same time!! This is what I am trying to drive home with you and shortbuskid. I'm not trying to make an excuse for everyone, just the ones that could not get out! Variables, remember variables, not everyone's situation is the same!!!

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 12:21 PM
The fact of the matter is that some of these people make less than that!!! Just because you have a few of those items dosen't mean that you are not poor!!! Some of those items could have been given to them for they are very old.
ROFL MAYBE you can get a pass on some of the jewelry but everything else on that list you're full of it. Unless you can show me that your grandfather passed down a trip to Mickey D's and some Marlboros.

The problem I am have is that you and shortbuskid lump everyone into the same categorie. Not everyone can do the exact same thing at the same time!! This is what I am trying to drive home with you and shortbuskid. I'm not trying to make an excuse for everyone, just the ones that could not get out! Variables, remember variables, not everyone's situation is the same!!!
The only people that couldn't make it 50 miles in two days have already been excused by everyone on this thread.

BIG_DADDY
09-07-2005, 12:23 PM
But how can you loot if you leave? :shrug:

Simplex3
09-07-2005, 12:24 PM
But how can you loot if you leave? :shrug:
Or shoot at rescuers. Or get your 5m of fame in front of the camera that you spent the last three days wading around up to your chest in water looking for so that you could bitch about not being able to get out.

way2kalm
09-07-2005, 12:43 PM
The only people that couldn't make it 50 miles in two days have already been excused by everyone on this thread.[/QUOTE]

These are the people I am referring to.

Adept Havelock
09-07-2005, 02:53 PM
I've found it interesting the last few days how many that are from a group likely to reject Darwin's thinking as it applies to Biology(normally, RW, with a few others thrown in for good measure), seemingly embrace it wholeheartedly when applied to Sociology (I.E. Survival of the Fittest, to hell with the weak and ignorant...Social Darwinism).

Good or bad? I don't know. Just interesting, at least to me.

SBK
09-07-2005, 05:03 PM
That's great, I am happy for you and your folks. But you can't assume that everyone that stayed was on welfare. But think back to when your mother was making the little amount she was making. Put yourself there and then add a cat 5 hurricane, now what? Maybe you have family you can go to, maybe you have friends you can go stay with. But what if you don't? You now have limited means of escaping the storm. What if you have no car and you are living check to check? What I am doing is throwing in variables. Do you remember algebra? You know how you start off with one equation, and solve it. Then you add in one extra variable. You solve it, but now it's alittle more difficult this time. Well, keep adding variables and you'll see my point

When I was growing up, I spent a lot of time in Southern Arkansas/Northern Louisiana. In the town my grandmother stayed in, it was very, very, very poor. Some of you wouldn't believe the house some people had to live in. Hell, some of them didn't have indoor plumbing until the 80's. Now unless they have family to go stay with, most of those folks can't just get up a leave town for an extended amount of time. These are the same people you are talking about. I say until you've met and interacted with people like this, you make the argument that you are trying to make.

Ok, my dad left. Took the car. My mom couldn't afford the utilities, let alone the rent. My 26 year old mom, with a 6,4 and 2 year old were screwed. We were homeless and carless. No insurance, no food, no nothing. My mom had an at home day care, which doesn't exist without a home.

I've been there. My mom chose a better way. As I have done. Just as these folks refused to do, and many paid with their lives, which is truly sad.

SBK
09-07-2005, 05:06 PM
I've found it interesting the last few days how many that are from a group likely to reject Darwin's thinking as it applies to Biology(normally, RW, with a few others thrown in for good measure), seemingly embrace it wholeheartedly when applied to Sociology (I.E. Survival of the Fittest, to hell with the weak and ignorant...Social Darwinism).

Good or bad? I don't know. Just interesting, at least to me.

I think they are saying that these people made the choice, it's not something that they could do nothing about.

Adept Havelock
09-07-2005, 05:08 PM
Yes, which is why I included the line about "to hell with the weak (those that couldn't leave) and the ignorant (those that could, but didn't).

Still, I find it curious.

SBK
09-07-2005, 05:11 PM
Yes, which is why I included the line about "to hell with the weak (those that couldn't leave) and the ignorant (those that could, but didn't).

Still, I find it curious.

The folks that truly couldn't leave get a pass on this one. They were let down. The vast majority of folks that were there were in fact there by choice. That's all.

Adept Havelock
09-07-2005, 05:14 PM
I'm still trying to understand the mindset that says "to hell with the ignorant". That's all. I've always believed you can judge a society by the way you treat the weakest links in the chain of society.

Obviously, many here do not share my view. That's fine. The world would be frightfully boring if we all thought the same way.

SBK
09-07-2005, 05:19 PM
I'm still trying to understand the mindset that says "to hell with the ignorant". That's all. I've always believed you can judge a society by the way you treat the weakest links in the chain of society.

Obviously, many here do not share my view. That's fine. The world would be frightfully boring if we all thought the same way.

This place would be boring if everyone had the same view. :)

Your statement about the weakest chain is going to open up a can of worms. No one in our society is weaker than the unborn, and look at how they get treated........:hmmm:

gblowfish
09-08-2005, 07:08 AM
Following his self-appointment as "morale officer" W entertains evacuees with his medly of "Proud Mary."

Simplex3
09-08-2005, 08:28 AM
I'm still trying to understand the mindset that says "to hell with the ignorant". That's all. I've always believed you can judge a society by the way you treat the weakest links in the chain of society.
We enable the weakest in our society to breed the most and work the least. It will be our downfall. Stupid people should struggle; if dumb people can't at least work hard then WTF good are they?