We've Got It Under Control, Cont'd

Julian Sanchez | September 4, 2005

Via Cafe Hayek, it appears that the Red Cross and other aid agencies were prevented from entering New Orleans to provide assistance by the National Guard. From the Red Cross website:

The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.

Doesn't that imply that the folks in charge thought that sending any kind of relief effort was a bad idea?

Comments

|9.4.05 @ 1:40PM|#

Guys, look up the word "evacuate". It doesn't mean "send in a lot of volunteers who we'll have to protect, feed, and eventually get back out."

As someone (Chertoff?) said today "We didn't let the Red Cross in because we didn't need any more victims."

Adam|9.4.05 @ 1:52PM|#

To be clear, the National Guard is following orders from either FEMA or the Governor's office.

Doesn't that imply that the folks in charge thought that sending any kind of relief effort was a bad idea?

Timing is everything. "Is" a bad idea - maybe, but "was" a bad idea, no. If they were blocked from getting into the city all last week, well, that would be completely and totally insane. But the Washington Post is reporting that there are only 1,500 people left to be evacuated. I have to imagine that the last 1,500 people in town are some hearty and rugged folks, and by now they've had opportunities to get fed and get out of town.

|9.4.05 @ 2:01PM|#

the people of new orleans have the right to be pissed. their own state government failed to send one iota of food or water to the official hurricane shelter. any one with a credit card couls have secured a tractor trailer load of water & food to be delivered to the same overpass that was used to evacuate the survivors. we're talking about a state that was 90% unscathed by katrina.

|9.4.05 @ 2:24PM|#

Uh, actually, Kujo, the reason those folks had to stay on that overpass was that it was impassible at both ends. A lot of people, especially a lot of city folk, are unaware that if you can't walk over it, you can't drive over it.

Adam|9.4.05 @ 2:34PM|#

Charlie (Colorado) - how the hell did they get up there? Were they out on the overpass during the storm? All I saw was Shep Smith on FoxNews damn near in tears and damn near incomprehensibly blabbering. How'd they get up there?

Uncle Sam|9.4.05 @ 2:58PM|#

I have to say, after looking at the affected area with Google earth that's one place I wouldn't care to live.

|9.4.05 @ 3:07PM|#

Promising refuge and aid in endangered areas encourages people to stay where they're not safe. The Dome is powerful evidence of the difficulties of giving people any reason to avoid evacuation.

|9.4.05 @ 3:17PM|#

Well, it's pretty obvious that government at all levels, local, state, and federal copulated with the canine at great length and with much gusto.

In a disaster, there's only one person that you can count on; yourself.

I find it despicable but unsurprising that even before they've gotten the problem under control public officials have been spending more time passing the buck than actually getting shit done.

|9.4.05 @ 3:37PM|#

Andy, my understanding is that they swam or were taken by people in boats, or walked through neck-deep water.

The fact that they stayed on the overpass --- in the face of dehydration, starvation, and heat prostration --- is pretty much prima facie proof that the road wasn't passible by people on foot. And, as I said, if you can't walk it, you can't drive a truck over it.

|9.4.05 @ 4:05PM|#

Doesn't that imply that the folks in charge thought that sending any kind of relief effort was a bad idea? No. Water and MREs were distributed. The emphasis remains on evacuation.

Touching anecdote...

"New Orleans already had a big homeless population. A lot of the already homeless refused to leave without their shopping carts. So they won't go near the evac centers, even though we have heard reports that the helocopters will now allow people to bring their shopping carts with them." The Interdictor

M1EK|9.4.05 @ 4:26PM|#

"The Dome is powerful evidence of the difficulties of giving people any reason to avoid evacuation."

Dynamist, you are a loathsome inhuman sack of crap. I can only hope that you're stuck needing help someday, as many of these people were. Even in Randtopia, there are going to be people who can't evacuate and cities which can't evacuate them.

|9.4.05 @ 5:50PM|#

M1EK,
I don't understand your hostility, the Dome isn't exactly on high ground with guaranteed access and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it doesn't take much in the way of failure to be in deep shit. The biggest problem in N.O. is that the plan seemed to rely on nothing going wrong and well...that didn't pan out with no real preperation and less than adequate evacuation.

|9.4.05 @ 7:28PM|#

I almost commented at the first "We've got it under control" thread.
Especially at times like this I'm amazed everyone doesn't have a Road to Damascus conversion to anarchism.
"Leaders" and "organizations" will always be obstacles to progress... major obstacles.
Inside our blood vessels, imagine "leaders" saying to white blood cells on the verge of surrounding and eliminating a problem germ, "Hold it! I'm in charge here!"
Leaders will always be able to point to gazillions of dollars donated as evidence of their effectiveness, but I'll wager the money and time and effectiveness that could be applied to solving problems in the ABSENCE of leaders would be greater by a factor of multiples were it not for leaders and organizations being obstacles.

Then you have the obstacle of old curmudgeons like myself who will not get off their asses until leaders are totally out of the picture.

|9.4.05 @ 7:54PM|#

Save me M1EK!

|9.4.05 @ 8:39PM|#

"The Dome is powerful evidence of the difficulties of giving people any reason to avoid evacuation."

Because the way things panned out at the Dome was the only possible way the trapped residents of New Orleans could have been given succor.

Don't think about any management failures. Don't ask who was resposible for, who had promised, who had taken over, carrying out emergency management responsibilities. Here, look at the monkey.

|9.4.05 @ 10:05PM|#

"Especially at times like this I'm amazed everyone doesn't have a Road to Damascus conversion to anarchism."

Ruthless, I've thought several times this week that if this disgusting situation doesn't turn people into libertarians (or anarchists) then any future effort to convince Americans of the evils of central planning seems to be in vain.

Sadly, I think most think that this was a problem caused either by a lack of funding or "having the wrong people in power."

Mike Kole|9.4.05 @ 10:35PM|#

Actually, it should turn anarchists into libertarians. Feast your eyes on real anarchy. Want some? Didn't think so.

It should open the eyes of those who believe that conditions set your moral compass rather than firm principles. Many say that theft is justified in disaster conditions. Well, that's what's been going on in N.O., and it has progressed to it's logical conclusion- anarchy, with rape and murder rampant.

Take this test: Which would you rather be faced with? A. You're in the Superdome with 100,000 people who believe that theft is justified by the circumstances, and that a disaster provides the correct setting to vent pent-up frustration over your perceived oppression; or, B. You're in the Superdome with 100,000 libertarians who believe that theft is always theft, no matter the circumstances, and that the initiation of force is always wrong.

Dusty|9.4.05 @ 10:37PM|#

"Doesn't that imply that the folks in charge thought that sending any kind of relief effort was a bad idea?"

You may want to infer it for whatever reasons you may have, but that implies nothing of the sort. The last thing those fine people in the National Guard need is to be shot while rescuing American Red Cross volunteers trapped in a hellhole. It would have been nice if you had snipped more of the Red Cross statement for your post. Like this:

"The Red Cross does not conduct search and rescue operations. We are an organization of civilian volunteers and cannot get relief aid into any location until the local authorities say it is safe and provide us with security and access."

If ARC had moved into the city and people showed up, those same people could've gotten out of the city, too and received the same attention and relief.

|9.4.05 @ 10:51PM|#

"Actually, it should turn anarchists into libertarians. Feast your eyes on real anarchy. Want some? Didn't think so."

I'm not an anarchist, but I don't think the drama we've seen in New Orleans suggests anything of the sort.

...I don't think anarchist theorists predicate their models on flooded metropolitan areas in the wake of a massively destructive hurricane. I don't think statist theorists do that either.

Comparing anarchist systems to a statist system under these conditions is like comparing a statist system during the civil war to an anarchist system in peace time. ...Apples and oranges, I think.

|9.4.05 @ 10:54PM|#

...Indeed, anarcho-capitalists may have an argument suggesting that a privately funded response would have reacted better. Considering the government's performance so far, I wouldn't want to be the guy on the other side of that argument.

|9.4.05 @ 11:02PM|#

Sadly, I think most think that this was a problem caused either by a lack of funding or "having the wrong people in power."
Comment by: matt at September 4, 2005 10:05 PM

matt,
You have accurately described the scales that need to be a-fallin' from the peepers of the hoi polloi.

|9.4.05 @ 11:40PM|#

"Actually, it should turn anarchists into libertarians. Feast your eyes on real anarchy. Want some? Didn't think so."

First, you need to differentiate between mass chaos (or what you would call "anarchy" in New Orleans) and the absence of coercive government (what most anarchists envision when using the term.).

Next, recognize that the absence of government does not equal the absence of law and order. (See the economist David Friedman, among others, for examples of the private privision of law.) New Orleans suffers from a lack of law and order, not government.

|9.4.05 @ 11:42PM|#

Charlie from colorado
you should check your facts. the buses were able to drive within 2 blocks of the superdome. check any article on the evacuation
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/03/katrina/main814649.shtml
I'm not sure how they do it in colorado but if they can drive a bus in, they surely could have driven a truckload of water & food to the superdome. again I say the people of LA sould be pissed at the local government.

|9.5.05 @ 12:21AM|#

Damn it! It's a tragic shame that the government doesn't try to adhere to the first precept of medicine: "First, do no harm".

This is emblematic of what's wrong with government in general, and good reason to limit its role to protecting against force and fraud. Government adapts inflexible categorical mind- sets: "Evacuate the city. Anything that gets in the way of evacuating the city must be stopped".
It doesn't matter to the government's idiot mind-set that the Red Cross would likely have saved lives and reduced suffering. That's the mission of the Red Cross.

|9.5.05 @ 12:41AM|#

This whole New Orleans tragedy would have likely been substantially avoided if the role for government in New Orleans was smaller.

It has been widely known for a long time that that key levy would not withstand a cat. five hurricane and that when one finally hit, the city would face ruination with loss of life. But, the government owned the levy and, "Oh well".

But, imagine this alternate scenario: The levy is privately owned and paid for by developers wishing to protect their developments. In this scenario, there would, of course, be insurance contracts that would engender a much more resilient levy that would be built to withstand the storm that was widely believed would eventually descend on New Orleans.

The Wine Commonsewer|9.5.05 @ 1:07AM|#

I thought I had heard it all. I, as a matter of course, expect government to fail at every juncture. I expect DMV service from every agency. But even as cynical as I am I cannot believe those PFers would prevent the Red Cross from helping. I frequently state that there is no hope. This time I really think I mean it.

|9.5.05 @ 1:17AM|#

I believe i heard someone say in a news report Sunday that it wasn't actually the levy that failed, but rather a part of the river channel wall. I'll try to find the link, but i'm pretty sure it was on CBS News. Anyone else here this?

Dusty|9.5.05 @ 2:20AM|#

Gary: "I believe i heard someone say in a news report Sunday that it wasn't actually the levy that failed, but rather a part of the river channel wall. I'll try to find the link, but i'm pretty sure it was on CBS News. Anyone else here this?"

There were three sections that failed:
-the east floodwall at the northern end of the 17th Street Canal (near the Lake)
- the east floodwall near the middle of the London Avenue Canal (off the Lake)
- the east levee or floodwall (I don't know which it was, yet) at the south end of the Inner Harbor Navagation Canal just above the floodgate at the Mississippi)

The locations are per a CNN report. I don't have the link handy right now and its late.

|9.5.05 @ 2:27AM|#

Much of the terrorism grant money is given under conditions that specifically exclude spending it on items or personnel that would be used in responding to hazards other than terrorism.

For all the paranoia about contaminating the water supply, you'd think some terrorists would also consider destroying a levee.

As far as evacuating people to the Superdome... anyone who thought that was a good idea ought not be a public servant. The Superdome was also in the path of the hurricane, about the only sense that idea made was to keep 20K people in a convenient grave.

I will at least let some offcials off the hook for the disaster the Superdome turned into, it was a one-day shelter until the storm passed, there was no expectation for it to be the flood shelter it became.

|9.5.05 @ 8:42AM|#

The Red Cross is basically a group of volunteers who are quickly trained to respond to disaster. They do not go into areas where danger exists. They help people who have been evacuated.

|9.5.05 @ 9:00AM|#

Rick,

You notions involving privatization of the levees has been heard a lot this past week.

I'm not sure how practical it would be seeing as the affected population probably has little in the way of resources and funding.

The developers you speak of had long ago turned their attention north and gotten away from the currently flooded areas.

But it's clear how impractical having the levees funded (or not) by tax dollars and managed (or not) by the Army Corps of Engineers and having the funding and management remain at the capricious whims of whatever political group holds the purse strings.

But then this is only one -and currently the most obvious - example of government susidizing failure.

Phil|9.5.05 @ 9:23AM|#

The Dome is powerful evidence of the difficulties of giving people any reason to avoid evacuation.

Right. Because for all the people without cars or other means, or without financial resources at hand, the best place to be caught when a Cat 3 storm or higher hits is "walking outside."

Keep beating that drum. Harder!

M1EK|9.5.05 @ 9:40AM|#

"Indeed, anarcho-capitalists may have an argument suggesting that a privately funded response would have reacted better"

Yes, and all the people who couldn't afford to get out of town were overflowing with funding to pay for their own emergency response.

Do you people ever actually look at what comes from your keyboards?

|9.5.05 @ 10:02AM|#

M1EK,

Bravo and well said.

Of course we can probably look torward the south for historical example of anarcho-capitalists contributing in a market-based fashion toward relief and re-construction.

We born-and-raised southerners typically refer to these anarcho-capitalists as "carpetbaggers."

As they contributed little actual value in the way of relief OR re-construction in anti-bellum south, I think we can safely say most anarcho-capitalists would step on a drowning person with no money's head to get a better view of the recently created waterfront property on which they have they're eye.

|9.5.05 @ 10:23AM|#

M1EK,

"Indeed, anarcho-capitalists may have an argument suggesting that a privately funded response would have reacted better"

With no irony, I'll point out that - at least in this case - the private response on the whole outpaced the federal, state and local government response immeasurably over the first five days.

If that's any weather vane, it still wasn't enough.

What the anarcho-capitalists forget is that the breakdown of social order (usually held in check by, oh I don't know...government, maybe?) has a terrific and rapacious cost.

If the only measure of value for you is monetary, I suppose that'll work.

But human life and societal well-being, though largely quantifiable to some folks satisfaction, is a far more precious thing to the majority of us.

I doubt even the most libertarian of refugees was waving off a relief vehicle in favor of someone who would make them pay for it.

|9.5.05 @ 10:51AM|#

WHy would anyone want back into the pit of the devastation which will undoubtably turn out to be a toxic wasteland in the short-term ? The Red Cross needs to stay out where they can really help and operate. THose who cannot understand the magnitude of this catastrophe still have time to be Mad ! Well, anger ain't going to fix it now. Action and solutions are so get on with the program and stop the bitching and hee-hawnng. HELP!

Shannon Love|9.5.05 @ 11:33AM|#

Self-reliance is part of a mindset that alters day-to-day behaviors over the long-term that culminate in individuals able to take care of themselves better in sudden emergencies.

I grew up in the rural American-West were the nearest official help was at least 30 minutes away, assuming they could find us. There was never the possibility of a 4 minute response time. As a consequence, we developed habits that meant we always had the resources around with us to handle emergencies. We also built strong ties with all our neighbors so we could support each other in a crises.

I have long noted that people who live in urban areas exhibit a strange passivity in regard to emergency preparedness. For them, help is always just a couple of minutes away. The idea that the authorities won't just materialize out the air seems wholly foreign to them. I confess that since I moved to an urban setting I no longer am as careful about such things.

People who think they will have to rely on themselves in case of emergency begin to alter the planning of their entire lives years before an actual disaster strikes. They build houses differently and in different locations, buy different vehicles, keep weapons and emergency supplies and make different political decisions than those who think they can rely on the state.

For example, how many people choose to stay in NO because they assumed the government managed levees would hold? Somebody with a more jaundiced view of government management would have trusted the levee system less. How many people stayed because they thought that government aid would flow quickly and efficiently after the disaster? How many left because they didn't think it would?

It is the mental mindsets of people that drives years of decision making that culminate in avoidable disasters such as NO. People with an independent mindset take care of themselves and create political systems that at leaner and more effective in a crises. People with a dependent mindset do the exact opposite.

I think that is the political and philosophical moral of this disaster.

|9.5.05 @ 11:33AM|#

Rick,

I'm glad you've turned up, because you're my Go To guy on the National Taxpayer's Union. I can't find anything on their website, but I know you're familiar with it.

If you please, can you confirm or deny the presence or absence of Louisiana Flood Prevention project in their "Pig Books" over the last few years?

|9.5.05 @ 11:36AM|#

As far as the privatization of the levees goes, I saw a reference to private and locally-built levees in comparison to the federal projects, and the conclusion drawn was that they were consistently flimsier and more poorly maintained than the federal levees. I'll see if I can find it again.

blah|9.5.05 @ 1:06PM|#

someone is confusing the "overpass" with the "underpass"

The "overpass" was where they were dropping people off early on, it was all wet at both ends at that time.

The "underpass" was the staging area to get on buses as I recall, but there were no buses, so people just congregated under the road. There was a dry path out of town from there, but people were not allowed to walk away, they were just told to wait for a bus to get them.

|9.5.05 @ 1:58PM|#

"With no irony, I'll point out that - at least in this case - the private response on the whole outpaced the federal, state and local government response immeasurably over the first five days."

With some irony, I'll point out that this is more or less what I posted in my comment:

"Considering the government's performance so far, I wouldn't want to be the guy on the other side of that argument."

...He didn't get it when I wrote it; he probably won't get it from you either. He, apparently, didn't see the "may" in, "...Indeed, anarcho-capitalists may have an argument suggesting that a privately funded response would have reacted better." either. ...It's hard to communicate with people in blow hard mode.

Do you think he ever actually looks at the comment he's responding to before he responds?

|9.5.05 @ 2:26PM|#

Charlie from colorado
you should check your facts. the buses were able to drive within 2 blocks of the superdome. check any article on the evacuation
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/03/katrina/main814649.shtml
I'm not sure how they do it in colorado but if they can drive a bus in, they surely could have driven a truckload of water & food to the superdome. again I say the people of LA sould be pissed at the local government.

Uhm, no, Kujo, you might want to look back at what you said: "overpass", not "superdome".

Nice try, though.

|9.5.05 @ 3:19PM|#

Yes, and all the people who couldn't afford to get out of town were overflowing with funding to pay for their own emergency response.

One would presume that this sort of thing would be handled by an evacuation policy with your insurance company, something that would be a very worthwhile product in a place like New Orleans. And given that a significant number of your neighbors will have such a policy with your company, it would be little trouble for them to pick you up as well and send you a bill.

And for those who are not customers with any insurance or other security agency, well, they can be billed too. Or that's where charity and goodwill start to fill the gaps.

And, by the way, evacuation is _cheap_, and it has excellent economy of scale. It would be trivially supplied by the private market at a much greater supply than the government services we saw employed this past week.

|9.5.05 @ 4:03PM|#

Ken,

MY comment was in response to M1EK and made perfect sense as I was giving some support to your sentiment on it's face.

But don't bitch me out for the sole fact that I dared to use your reference to 'anarcho-capitalists'. Maybe your feelings are hurt because you're an 'anarcho-capitalist' and our remarks were somewhat disparaging

But I did read you post. So what. You think putting the word 'may' into your post means we can't comment on it?

If you got something to say that gives some logical support to the 'anarcho-capitalist' thing, then lay it out, brother. We're all ears.

|9.5.05 @ 4:13PM|#

"MY comment was in response to M1EK and made perfect sense as I was giving some support to your sentiment on it's face.

I wasn't tryin' to bitch you out madpad. ...peace brother! ...I appreciated the support.

I was bitchin' out M1EK--all my bitchy comments were directed at M1EK. Peace!

M1EK|9.5.05 @ 4:19PM|#

"And, by the way, evacuation is _cheap_, and it has excellent economy of scale. It would be trivially supplied by the private market at a much greater supply than the government services we saw employed this past week."

Good lord.

If that's true, why WASN'T it supplied by the private market last week?

M1EK|9.5.05 @ 4:21PM|#

"He, apparently, didn't see the "may" in, "...Indeed, anarcho-capitalists may have an argument suggesting that a privately funded response would have reacted better." either. ."

I DID see the 'may'.

You may be smoking crack if you think anarcho-capitalists may have that argument.

HTH.

|9.5.05 @ 4:41PM|#

If that's true, why WASN'T it supplied by the private market last week?

Um... Did you read the posting that started this thread?

M1EK|9.5.05 @ 5:16PM|#

Is the Red Cross considered 'private' in the sense that it's a 'private market'? It's a friggin' charity.

|9.5.05 @ 6:11PM|#

ken/tom(?)

Awright...peace. You used a quote from my post so I was a little confused.

Still...I'm obviously not sold on the 'anarcho-capitalist' bent...I live in Florida and until now, government assitance has usually been pretty solid -and helpdful - in times of hurricanes.

While the private aid way outdid FEMA, the State of Louisiana or the City of New Orleans, they could not replace the breakdown of social order that exacerbated everything.

Arguably, it's the resumption of order at the hands of government intervention that's taking care of that nugget.

On that item, I kinda see this as a unique circumstance for a variety of reasons.

Still, private aid is an ongoing significant part of the whole thing.

|9.5.05 @ 8:45PM|#

Is the Red Cross considered 'private' in the sense that it's a 'private market'? It's a friggin' charity.

The point of the article is that private organizations were prevented from evacuating or supplying the trapped.

The government evacuates people at no charge. I'm not complaining about that; saving lives is something it ought to do or facilitate. But that does put a damper on the private production of evacuation and relief services, a damper that would not be there if there were no government.

Now add on top of that the fact that -- for reasons good or stupid -- the government forbids private evacuation or provisioning. In effect government makes itself the monopoly supplier of life-saving relief services.

Is it any wonder that such services were undersupplied?

|9.5.05 @ 9:20PM|#

The Red Cross can't get into New Orleans because the dumb fucks that are "trapped" in there are SHOOTING at them! Why? Because the Red Cross is a bunch of whiteys.

|9.5.05 @ 9:43PM|#

Y'all are missing the main point by arguing the finer points. There were thousands of lives that could have been saved in New Orleans if the full brunt of the national gov't had been brought to bear from the beginning. Period.

|9.5.05 @ 9:49PM|#

How does arguing about why the victims did what they did exuse us from helping them? Do we kill people or let them die for thier beliefs and thier failure to conform to our beliefs? Is this America?

|9.5.05 @ 9:54PM|#

Can anyone justify thier points or beliefs at the expense of old people dying, young children starving, etc? Can you? Does thier suffering help you win arguments?

|9.5.05 @ 10:03PM|#

Sorry, we know some rescue teams didn't want to bear the risk of their members being killed, so they pulled out. Call me, at 502-839-9531 and I will come down there, I will risk my life to help those ones who need a helping hand. Call me and I will try to ignore the threats, even though I am not a professional rescuer and I will come down there on my days off (my vacation days are gone). I am off Mon thru Thu. I work 3 days a week, Fri thru Sun. Let me know if some rudimentary electrical and mechanical skills or even brute labor can help. Please be specific and leave a phone number. God bless and forgive.

|9.6.05 @ 2:11AM|#

madpad at 9:00 AM,

The scenario that I envisioned would have the developers paying for the levees, and the levees suitability motivated by insurance contracts. That some, or even most, of the folks living in the developments have little in the way of resources, shouldn't affect the dynamic.

And as you point out, the government ownership scenario manifestly has problems. And they are of tragic proportions.

|9.6.05 @ 2:27AM|#

Shannon at 11:33 AM,

Your points are very interesting. I think a corollary of some of them is that; the fact government "help" makes folks less self-reliant, may at times have very sad consequences.

|9.6.05 @ 2:49AM|#

joe at September 5, 2005 11:33 and 11:38 AM,

Sorry, I only now read this and I'm wiped out and wanna crash. But tomorrow I will check the National Taxpayer's Union site: http://www.ntu.org/main/
And I will post back if I find anything, even if this thread has gone "down under" by that time.

I'm betting that private levees tend to be more reliable where and when it counts. The responsibilities of private ownership, enforced by insurance contracts, make them that way.

|9.6.05 @ 2:57AM|#

M1EK at 5:16 PM:

Is the Red Cross considered 'private' in the sense that it's a 'private market'? It's a friggin' charity.

The Red Cross is certainly part of the private and voluntary sector, as opposed to the government, coercive sector.

|9.6.05 @ 3:07AM|#

Oops, I meant: joe at 11:33 and *11:38* AM

...As if goofing the citation by 2 minuets is gonna matter! I really gotta crash.

|9.6.05 @ 3:12AM|#

Geeze, I mean 11:36 AM!! Ok, I'm steppimg away from the keyboard now. zzzzzz

M1EK|9.6.05 @ 10:34AM|#

"In effect government makes itself the monopoly supplier of life-saving relief services.

Is it any wonder that such services were undersupplied?"

THERE IS NO MONEY TO BE MADE BY EVACUATING PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO PAY YOU.

Can you please tattoo this on the inside of your eyelids?

|9.6.05 @ 10:57AM|#

"THERE IS NO MONEY TO BE MADE BY EVACUATING PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO PAY YOU."

There is also no (appparent) money to be made by donating millions to charity that various individuals and businesses have done over the past week. So then, why have they done it?

|9.6.05 @ 11:35AM|#

The great majority of the evacuation was, in fact, private - people who had cars, for the most part, got in them and left. People who didn't, or couldn't, or hard-core idiots who wanted to "wait it out", stayed and suffered the consequences. Certainly not fair to those who had no means to escape, but nature is not known for being merciful.

M1EK|9.6.05 @ 12:47PM|#

"There is also no (appparent) money to be made by donating millions to charity that various individuals and businesses have done over the past week. So then, why have they done it?"

Because people like to help people in need. How many millions were donated BEFORE the storm to 'private relief companies'? The whole theory among the hard-core randroids here is that the gummint should simply get out of the emergency relief business, remember. So who would have evacuated all those people? The Red Cross Auxiliary?

|9.6.05 @ 1:44PM|#

M1EK: Thanks for the label. The Red Cross and Salvation Army do not set up shelters below the 25ft line for the same reason that makes me an inhuman sack of crap. I would much rather be aligned with shitbags like that than helpless bloggers who have never looked at the situation until it was too late.

Phil: Why do you demean me when you could actually be learning that people continue to refuse evacuation? You might spend a little time in the area someday. How you want it to be is not supported by the information available to all.

All you geniuses who think those school buses were wasted: Have you any idea if the buses had fuel or tires? Are you aware of the trouble the Orleans Parish schools were in before Katrina saved them from the ultimate embarassement of being taken over by the State or the Feds?

The preparation you all are overlooking is to convince the poor that the government is trustworthy when they come to take them away from all they have and have ever known. Show them that their house will be secure when they leave it to the feral element that prowls the neighborhood every day. Do that, and then maybe the buses would make a difference.

Keep farting in the bag and convincing yourselves what you smell is roses. But meanwhile, please continue sending help. You've obviously got the concern.