Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by oatmealschnappz on Aug 30, 2007 21:35:13 GMT -5
bos1969 said:
I want to know WHY is it always about New Orleans????? Katrina wipes out 80% of Mississippi's coastline - we lost lives here also but NOLA gets all the media and the Poor NOLA - we have entire cities and communities on our coast that were wiped out completely!
But no one ever talks about Mississippi - it is always about the poor blacks in the 9th Ward - not much is ever said about the poor white people in Mississippi most of whom had no insurance or whose insurance companies are refusing to pay out citing storm surge as the cause.
Most of the devestation in New Orleans was caused by a failed levee system - the destruction of the Gulf Coast was causeed directly by Hurricane Katrina. We still have thousands of people living in cramped FEMA trailers and they are nothing but targets for another storm that rolls in.
With all due respect, I think that the reason that the vast majority of attention has been on NOLA(and more specifically the lower 9th) is that it was/should have been totally avoidable there. As you yourself said, the devestation in coastal New Orleans was due to a faulty levee system. Levees that have supposedly been being rebuilt, improved and refortified (sp?) for over 40 years. Yet, they failed. They failed in a catastrophic and inexcusable way, leaving miles and miles of uninhabitable "neighborhoods". When you combine the obvious ambivalence and negligence of pre-Katrina preperation with the disgusting history of our government actually flooding the very same areas specifically in order to save the more profitable tourist areas and affluent neighborhoods of the Fench Quarter, it is inevitable that more attention will be drawn to the (almost total) destruction of of the poor and unnecessarily defenseless coastal sections of Louisana.
I'm, in no way, trying to trivialize or detract from the obvious tragedies and horror stories I've heard about/from the people in southern Mississppi. They also went through a devestaing disaster that destroyed property, as well as innocent lives. The difference, in my opinion, is that unstoppable hurricaine-force winds and torrential rain are to blame in Mississippi. In NOLA, the vast majority of death and destruction was not directly from the Katrina it's self. It was caused by man-made negligence, pure and simple. It's a terrible and horrifying fact of life that people who live in coastal regions (especially the Gulf coast) have and will die needlessly in hurricaines but, the people in New Orleans died in a flood. A predictable, avoidable and wholy unnecessary flood. A flood brought forth by a near-by storm and governmental ambivalence.
I'm really not trying to argue with you, Meg. I promise. I'm just trying to explain why I (and others) tend to focus our attention and outrage on the part of the tragedy that took place in NOLA.
^^^Oh - I understand that - it just frustrates me that the media and it seems everyone else focuses soley on NOLA and the Gulf Coast region never gets any media except locally within our state. Like I said previously - it was still a catagory 1 when it hit Jackson and I live 3 hours from the coast - it wsa bad here - I can only imagine how it was down there - 'specially for the people that had no transportation or means to get out of there.
Part of the prob I see with NOLA is that they did not issue the mandatory evac orders when they should have -(almost 15 hours prior to when they did) nor did they both to utilize the transportation that the city could have utilized to remove people from areas before the levess broke.
All the same - it was a devestating storm allthe way around - Ijust don't think Mississippi is getting the help it should to try and rebuild and wish the focus would shift a little our way and off NOLA just a little bit
Nobody talks about the damage still left from Floyd in North Carolina. There are people in Florida who are still f*cking around with FEMA and insurance companies from when Andrew came through.
The whole system is screwed, more so now than ever. Thank you Micheal Chertoff, he should be Attorney General or something
Post by oatmealschnappz on Aug 30, 2007 21:52:10 GMT -5
I think that that is the problem. People die every year due to storms...and even more have their lives utterly destroyed. It's human nature to want to find someone to blame and/or hold responsible when something horrible happens. Katrina is not only the worst natural disaster (most damage and death did occur in Louisana) in U.S. history but, it's the only one who's effects can actually be traced directly back to the actions of humans. Right or wrong, and regardless of other similar tragedies, this one is percieved (and rightly so, if you ask me)as being made worse by our government and it's reaction (or lack there of).
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 21:55:53 GMT -5 by oatmealschnappz - Back to Top
well again people choose to live there. all hurricane damage is a result of the actions of people building there. the same with people that build on flood plains. and to some extent people who build in earthquake zones. if it happened to me id blame myself for living in a place i was 100 percent sure would be devestated eventually. if you wanna live there fine. but why expect the rest of the country to foot the bill for the government to come bail you out and complain about it if it dosent happen fast enough or isan unpleasant experience?
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 22:04:20 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
and not that it should really matter but louisiana and mississippi were both bush states in the election. you reap what you sow. this administration displayed a level of complete incompetence at everythign they did that is beyond belief. why put your faith in them to handle something as important as your communities safety and rebuilding and then bitch when thay are completely incompetent at that too? i guess its just a bible belt thing. they never have seemed interested in observing and accepting reality..
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 22:12:51 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
alyroo
Bonnafunky Dirtyroo Princess of Blinkytown and moonpie expert
People build on the Outer Banks in NC. They get hit often but they rebuild. It's surprising how many of the structures stay up. The locals who are there year round just clean up the mess and go fishing. It's different there though, it's a much smaller population and evacuations happen so often that people just have a bag ready all the time.
and dude, Sure it sucks to live in a floodplain but you can't move entire towns. It's one of those situations where you have to deal with what you have not with what you wish you had. Beaches make good ports and floodplains have good farmland, the cities grew where they grew. Now it's the governments job to see that this country's people are protected, everywhere, and not just from terrorists either.
edit* and dude, Give the South some time. The Days of Strom and Jesse are fading. The textile jobs are going overseas. Good ole boys will only take so much. They're slowly waking up.
well again people choose to live there. all hurricane damage is a result of the actions of people building there. the same with people that build on flood plains. and to some extent people who build in earthquake zones. if it happened to me id blame myself for living in a place i was 100 percent sure would be devestated eventually. if you wanna live there fine. but why expect the rest of the country to foot the bill for the government to come bail you out and complain about it if it dosent happen fast enough or isan unpleasant experience?
Ahhh, Comrade Dude....where would you order the mandatory relocation of these idiots to? They have to live somewhere....Montana has a lot of space....maybe there? You'll pay taxes to pay for the relocation of course? And build new houses or FEMA trailers until they can find jobs...cause I doubt there will be a million new jobs created overnight in Montana just to facilitate the convenient relocation of all these people to a more stable climate....
The Port of New Orleans is a valuable asset that is neccessary for commerce and trade and has to have workers.....the Gulf Coast is a thriving tourist area that has to have workers.....people will live in areas that are subject to natural disasters...there is no way to prevent that....tornados happen everywhere...we can stop spending tax dollars on it....but forcing people not to live there is NOT the answer. Somehow, amazingly, the Dutch and the Belgians have managed to build state of the art levy systems that can withstand more than cat 5 hurricanes for less money than FEMA has spent on Katrina relief so far.......for the entire countries.....and we can't secure one major US city????? Give me a break.....
well i agree to some extent. but the fact is that most of these people could live elsewhere. you can buy a house in a hurricane or flood prone area or you can buy in an area that dosent have that. and i beleive its completely within your rights to live whereever you please. but to expect the rest of the country to keep throwing billions of dollars your way ever few years is silly to me. id rather have our schools or healthcare system get the funding they need then send billions and billions to these disasters time and again. i know the cities are there and thats just the way its. but the lack of personal accountability is amazing to me. people move to flood plains. where they dont offer flood insurance. and then act surprised when they lose everything. and then they rebuild there! its insanity to keep repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome.
i dont believe in mandatory relocation. i believe in personal accountability. if you know that floods or hurricanes ARE going to happen where you move. and they dont offer insurance to cover that then dont be a surprised whiner when you lose it all. tornadoes are n extremely random event. floods and hurricanes are not. and i dont know of anywhere that houses cant be insured against tornadoes. if there was i wouldnt move there. but then again i hold myself accountable for my decisions. it would be easier if i could just throw my arms up and say damn.... uhh you guys fix this. and do it quicker.
edit-- and dont get me wrong. im disgusted by what happened and still is happening with katrina. and it is just another massive faliure of our government. but io there is ore to it then that. people make poor decisions and they should learn to accept respnsibility for those decisions.
personally if i lived there and had destroyed property you can bet your ass it would have burned to the ground the day i could get to it. let my fire insurance cover it.
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 22:39:50 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
alyroo
Bonnafunky Dirtyroo Princess of Blinkytown and moonpie expert
I also believe in preparing yourself for that kind of threat. It's when people are told "Hey, don't worry about living here, if anything happens you have Allstate to protect you." or "Don't worry Federal insurance covers it all" and then...
it doesn't.
You THOUGHT you were prepared but because of inefficient red tape bullshit and outright greed on the part of the insurance companies you're screwed anyway. WTF!?!
Post by oatmealschnappz on Aug 30, 2007 22:45:04 GMT -5
dudewhersmyinforoo said:
well i agree to some extent. but the fact is that most of these people could live elsewhere. you can buy a house in a hurricane or flood prone area or you can buy in an area that dosent have that. and i beleive its completely within your rights to live whereever you please. but to expect the rest of the country to keep throwing billions of dollars your way ever few years is silly to me. id rather have our schools or healthcare system get the funding they need then send billions and billions to these disasters time and again. i know the cities are there and thats just the way its. but the lack of personal accountability is amazing to me. people move to flood plains. where they dont offer flood insurance. and then act surprised when they lose everything. and then they rebuild there! its insanity to keep repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome.
I agree to an extent. In the evolution of civilization, we are the first country to ever feel so entitled that we openly defy nature and still expect to maintain our quality of life. In the past couple of thousand years, when god, allah or stan saw fit to destroy everything in sight, we got the hint and moved away. Now, we tend to stubbornly stand there and say "This is my home and I'm stayin'!" While I can't fault people for living in the cities that they were born in, I do feel that, at some point, we (as a people) have to get the fvcking message and move the hell away! Much like I'd rather give an Ethiopian $100 once to move rather than provide just enough ($.31 a day) rice to barely survive where they are, I'd rather pay an increased tax-rate for a few years to help improve the coastal residents (future) quality of life than keep contributing a yearly pittance to keep them afloat for yet another year/storm season.
Maybe that is an unpopular outlook but, there is definitely some truth in it.
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 23:22:11 GMT -5 by oatmealschnappz - Back to Top
Could they live someplace else? Yes.....but like you say...people should be able to live where they want. I guess my view is if you live on a beach...or within view of a beach or ocean....then yeah....expect the worst and pay for it. But at some point, if it is an established city, a commerce-generating entity with services, collecting taxes, you can have some expectation that you deserve some protection...even if it is a flood plain, hurricane zone, etc. That is irrelevant. If we avoided all flood plains, (btw...there is no such thing as a "flood plain" there is 50 year, 100 year, 200 year etc) and hurricane zone is also impossible to predict as they can come inland as far as 300 miles like Katrina.....I certainly wouldn't consider Jackson MS in a "hurricane zone", but like Meg says, they got Katrina as a cat 1....we would waste a LOT of real estate in this country. And a lot of gas driving to jobs that HAVE to be done. Insurance....that's a whole seperate racket...and I DO mean racket.....
Would I prefer that we spend our tax money on health care and other big issues HELL YES! But like I said, levys could be built to withstand the worst hurricanes for less money than Hillary or McCain will spend on their campaign ads this year and it wouldn't have to even be an issue anymore..... ???
How about they just rebuild New Orleans the other direction, y'know inland.
edit* Bama has a good point. When Floyd hit NC my brother was two hours away from any beach. The surge came up the river and flooded half of Greenville... well, that'd never happened before. It took out half of the off campus student housing at ECU... and trust me choice was not a factor in choosing those "houses" ( I use the term very loosely). My brother was a few miles from the Tar River and had water surrounding their house, no power, and no clue what to do. They left the house not knowing if they'd get out or be able to get back. Princeville was destroyed. That's the oldest established Free African-American town. It had stood for well over 100 years. It had never flooded like that before. Now what do you say to those poor rural black people whose families had lived in this historic place for generations?
Freaky things happen, man. You just never know what power nature can unleash. If dude had a freak blizzard with 15 feet of snow I would expect some gov't entity to do something for you and it would be tax money well spent.
I agree to an extent. In the evolution of civilization, we are the first country to ever feel so entitled that we openly defy nature and still expect to maintain our quality of life.
LOL! So I must have been the only kid that read the nursery rhyme/fairy tale about the boy putting his finger in the dike huh?
well to me it dosent atter whether its 50yr, 100yr , or any of that. or how many miles it is from the shore. if you cant get insurance to cover something that is likely to happen to your home then id suggest living somewhere else. i do say live wherever ya want. but if you know your not insured for something that is definitly going to happen then i place all of the blame on you.
I agree to an extent. In the evolution of civilization, we are the first country to ever feel so entitled that we openly defy nature and still expect to maintain our quality of life.
LOL! So I must have been the only kid that read the nursery rhyme/fairy tale about the boy putting his finger in the d**e huh?
Thanks Ally, that's a great illustration of what I was trying to say!
We can't KNOW all cases....nor even when we KNOW there are cases (like NOLA) we may NEED to put the money into protecting them rather than just abandoning them, they may be important enough for either commerce (the port and offshore oil rigs) culture and history, or just economy and tourism to invest the money in the levy system and building them up. It is not an all-or-nothing scenario.
If dude had a freak blizzard with 15 feet of snow I would expect some gov't entity to do something for you and it would be tax money well spent.
they would take 3 weeks to plow the roads. my insurance would cover any damage to my home. if my insurance company told me that blizzard damage wouldnt be covered by my policy i wouldnt invest my money in a home here. althoguh i think 15 feet of snow here is even less likely then a tornado. which im also covered for. and neither is as likely as a fire. im covered for that too. its common sense. and it dosent sound like your brother owned property so id suggest renters iinsurance which i assume would cover damages such as that. if he needed assistance in getting to safety then im all for the governent coming to help in that case and would be happy to have y tax dollars go to that. especially in a freak case like that. now if there was warning and a mandatory or even a suggested evacuation then i wouldnt be as for it. but no matter what people should be taken to safety. but if there was a mandatory evacuation and they stayed they should have to pay for its cost.
EDIT-- and if i moved to an area and the insurance companies refused to offer a certain type of protection that would raise red flags to me. wheteher you live on the water or 5 miles from it. if you cant get insurance to cover it its not a good idea. buyer beware. id accept that i made a poor decision and it cost me. if your insured you dont need to know. insurance is for freek things. these people are compalining about SURE things happening that arent covered.
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 23:13:56 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
hmmmm... i honestly dont have a clue what my insurance would cover in that case. but if we are having earthquakes in northern michigan strong enough to damage foundations i think that i would have much more serious concerns then the condition of my property because i assume the world would be coming to an end. i wonder if they cover volcanoes, tsunamis, and meteor strikes here too
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 23:17:18 GMT -5 by Dude - Back to Top
hmmmm... i honestly dont have a clue what my insurance would cover in that case. but if we are having earthquakes in northern michigan strong enough to damage foundations i think that i would have much more serious concerns then the condition of my property because i assume the world would be coming to an end. i wonder if they cover volcanoes, tsunamis, and meteor strikes here too
Trust me....you don't want to know... Insurance companies won't cover any "earth movement", "foundation settling" type stuff without special riders....I had every tile in my kitchen split along a straight line....even the concrete in my driveway! In the middle of the night, just cracked all at once.....no earthquake...no sinkhole....nothing. If it had been a burst waterpipe...no problem.....but just a shift in the foundation....not covered $6000 to replace the floor........I'll live with the crack for a while.....
Remind me why I pay homeowners insurance again?????
Renter's insurance, sure, lots of college students have renter's insurance, for their vast collection of CD's and a computer, uh huh. That wasn't the issue in Greenville. It was the HOUSES. There was nowhere for people to live. The whole area... gone. This is a college town where the students make up half the population. The Government HAD to step in and should've anyway. That's the town's infrastructure, revenue, and reputation.
It happened once. If it happens again are they all stupid for keeping a university and its infrastructure there? What if it happens a third time? Should they just move all of eastern North Carolina? If so, how far inland is enough?
Hugo hit Charlotte in 1990 or '91. No power for a week. Look at a map we're so far from the beach that it's closer to get to Bonnaroo from here.
The beauracracy that supports FEMA and the Red Cross and The National Guard is there for a reason. Katrina IS that reason. Blaming the people for living is bass-ack-wards. They weren't bitching after 24 hours they were crying out in desperation after 5, count 'em, F-I-V-E days of nothing... from anywhere... except from Sean Penn.
Outrage is justified and almost required. Whether you think they could've been better prepared is beside the point. Finding fault and pointing the finger is useless. The damage is done.
he only thing left to do is stop it from happening again and help to repair the lives that were destroyed with efficiency and honesty.
Post by oatmealschnappz on Aug 30, 2007 23:28:24 GMT -5
bamabelle said:
oatmealschnappz said:
I agree to an extent. In the evolution of civilization, we are the first country to ever feel so entitled that we openly defy nature and still expect to maintain our quality of life.
LOL! So I must have been the only kid that read the nursery rhyme/fairy tale about the boy putting his finger in the d**e huh?
While much of northwestern Europe is indeed under sea-level, that part of the world simply doesn't ever get hit by hurricaines. That story was more of a comment on the basic absurdity of building cities in low-lying areas than on modern-day practicality.
I don't think it's fair or respectful to equate a real-life disaster with a fairy tale.
Last Edit: Aug 30, 2007 23:31:26 GMT -5 by oatmealschnappz - Back to Top
