New at Reason

Julian Sanchez | September 13, 2005

Officials keep insisting that Katrina survivors are not "refugees." Kerry Howley agrees: We have competently executed plans for dealing with international refugees.

Comments

|9.13.05 @ 2:44PM|#

We already have Katrina refugees in my area (North of Houston) who are putting their kids in school and getting at least temporary jobs. I find myself suspecting that they should try to stay from anything FEMA-related.

|9.13.05 @ 2:55PM|#

here's a better suggestion that was posted on marginal revolution for dealing with the housing crisis. Too bad it appears to have fallen on deaf ears.

|9.13.05 @ 3:17PM|#

Captain Awesome:

I didn't think landlords cared much for Section 8, and would probably fight pretty hard to oppose any expansion of it. I don't think government harassment of landlords is the solution to people who aren't able to take provide for themselves.

aj|9.13.05 @ 3:29PM|#

To insist that it is beneath an American to be a refugee, is a complete insult to the rest of the world. Just another thing that doesn't apply to us. It should have raised the status of refugee, now that we know how it feels, instead, that word is now off limits for USA citizens, making sure it still can be applied to those other people, in any derogatory fashion that fits those future circumstances.

God forbid something happens to the USA and we can actually admit to it.

|9.13.05 @ 4:47PM|#

There's an error in the article -- it wasn't Hurricane Andrew that hit Punta Gorda last year, but Hurricane Charley.

Hurrican Andrew hit the Miami area in 1992.

|9.13.05 @ 5:41PM|#

My landlady made an interesting comment last night- we were discussing (generally disparagingly) how families in the U.S. tend to be so spread out geographically, and she said that Katrina illustrates one advantage in that people have family they can go to in case of disaster. If your whole extended family lives in N.O., Gulfport, or Biloxi, then your whole family is just screwed. But with the modern family diaspora, more people have somewhere to go, with someone who will help them in a more personal way than a bureaucrat assigned to help refugees.

So kids, move far away from home, in the interest of National Security!

|9.13.05 @ 5:54PM|#

My landlady made an interesting comment last night- we were discussing (generally disparagingly) how families in the U.S. tend to be so spread out geographically, and she said that Katrina illustrates one advantage in that people have family they can go to in case of disaster. If your whole extended family lives in N.O., Gulfport, or Biloxi, then your whole family is just screwed. But with the modern family diaspora, more people have somewhere to go, with someone who will help them in a more personal way than a bureaucrat assigned to help refugees.

So kids, move far away from home, in the interest of National Security!

|9.13.05 @ 5:57PM|#

American's cannot be occupiers and they cannont be refugees.

Phil|9.13.05 @ 7:18PM|#

"Refugee" has a specific political and legal meaning. That's the reason that government and NGOs are avoiding the terminology. Other than that, colloquially I see no problem with it.

|9.13.05 @ 8:08PM|#

We don't like to help individuals here in the U.S., we seem to want to give aid to institutions and organizations instead of to people directly.

|9.13.05 @ 10:03PM|#

I feel somewhat baited and switched by the set-up to this thread.
If the world were more sensitive to the logistics of caring for refugees, the world would be a lot more peaceful.
Governments throw up so many barriers to refugees, it prevents people from thinking about them in the way they should. They give up.
Eliminate all "defense" spending. Spend less than half the amount on refugees, and watch the world thrive.

|9.13.05 @ 11:56PM|#

American's cannot be occupiers and they cannont be refugees.

Americans can't even be Americans in peace. Instead we get the war on drugs, the war on fat, the war on civil rights (I mean terrorism)....

|9.14.05 @ 12:01AM|#

Eliminate all "defense" spending. Spend less than half the amount on refugees, and watch the world thrive.

I feel baited-and-switched too. Listen to you -- how un-Ruthless of you to say such things.

What you're saying would only be true for those "refugees" who actually want to help themselves.

Unfortunately, not all of them do.

Which is not an excuse for ruining those who would help themselves.

Larry A|9.14.05 @ 3:24PM|#

When my father was stationed in West Germany I remember going with my mother and other ladies of the Officer's Wives Club to deliver holiday baskets to the displaced persons (DPs) in the nearby refugee camp.

Note that this was in 1957, and the camp's population had been displaced prior to World War II.

Of course as a 10-year-old kid, I couldn't understand why they didn't just make all of them German citizens and close the camp. It's not like they were damyankees or anything.