The Gulf Coast (Katrina Revisited)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 21 2006, 10:12 AM) [snapback]306757[/snapback]</div>

My veiw if goverments are reponcable for katrina and this childs death is ludacris.
I think alot of people should beable to work and not get paid.

I'm just not sure we are seeing the same issues. :huh:

 

No it is not the governments fault. You are right...they had time to get out. Everyone did the best they could under the situation. Long term the government should have done more to get the area safe and back on its feet. It has been a year and many parts still look like a war zone. FEMA was a joke...too bad Hezbollah was not in charge...then everyone could have gotten $10,000 on Iran within a couple days.

 

"Should the federal goverment be responsible for those who died in katrina? why?"

Because an individual person cannot build and maintain a levee. Apparently our Government, to which we pay taxes to build and maintain levees (and other public projects), cannot do it either.

Why did some people NOT leave? Because they couldn't. She should have walked out of town with her 5 yr. old in tow when she was told to? (No car, not enough or no busses, exactly how was she supposed to leave?)

Chalk another one up to Social Darwinism. Not to be confused with evolution.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 21 2006, 01:35 PM) [snapback]306838[/snapback]</div>

Because you know where she lived and how close higher ground was. And you assume *she* knew where higher ground was.

And you've hiked 5-10 miles with a five year old?

Do you know what Social Darwinism is?

"Historically, proponents of Social Darwinism have used the theory to justify social inequality as being meritocratic. At various times it has also been used to justify laissez-faire capitalism, or imperialism."

Social Darwinism

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 21 2006, 12:12 PM) [snapback]306865[/snapback]</div>

Social Darwinism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Social darwinism)
Jump to: navigation, search
To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup.
Please discuss this issue on the talk page, or replace this tag with a more specific message. Editing help is available.
This article has been tagged since April 2006.

Anyway,

Everyone knew that the levees would not withstand the expected sea rise.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 21 2006, 01:12 PM) [snapback]306757[/snapback]</div>

Yes you can - you can simply walk outside away from the noise.

The government response was botched - the political appointee (Brownee) was hopeless out of his depth. The levees are maintained with Tax payer money - but in this case the poor people of NO got screwed while some people made out like bandits on the tax largess.

Wow! Lots of people were INCAPABLE of leaving by virtue of infirmity, children, and a number of other factors. Talk about a completely callous view on a terrible tragedy.

Its great seeing the open hearted response from America - then there are people like you. You completely ignore that lots of the reasons why people died was a direct result of poverty or infirmity. So long as can afford it, you can escape, otherwise its walking or just sitting tight.

I am missing your point

False Dichotomy, meet Straw Man Argument ; Straw Man Argument, meet False Dichotomy.

Bah. Go get come compassion. I hear that there is a tax credit if you get it on lease.

 

"Social Darwinism is a belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die."

"Social Darwinism applied to a social context too, of course. It provided a justification for the more exploitative forms of capitalism in which workers were paid sometimes pennies a day for long hours of backbreaking labor. Social Darwinism also justified big business' refusal to acknowledge labor unions and similar organizations, and implied that the rich need not donate money to the poor or less fortunate, since such people were less fit anyway."

Thinkquest

"Some social Darwinists argue that governments should not interfere with human competition by attempting to regulate the economy or cure social ills such as poverty. Instead, they advocate a laissez-faire political and economic system that favors competition and self-interest in social and business affairs."

Encarta

So...it was her own fault she had a small child.

It was her fault she was too poor to own a car.

It was her fault she was too stupid to know where higher ground was.



I highly recommend watching the episode of "30 days" where the guy and his girl friend live for a month on minimum wage.

 

The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick and the needy, and the handicapped.
Hubert Humphrey

This Government has failed. The better question is: On what issues has it succeeded? Oh, yes, gays not getting married. Silly me.

 

I grew up in that area. Southern Mississippi specifically. I will agree that she should have done something other than stay put. However, there are two factors involved.

1. Capability to escape. Without a car (many can't afford even a $200 car, especially when it's likely to break down in a month anyway, and certainly can't afford maintenance, gas, insurance, taxes, registration, etc.) she obviously wouldn't be able to drive anywhere. I'll assume that she didn't have a car. If she had a decently working car, then no, she has no excuse. As I understand, evacuation assistance was poor at best, so without a vehicle, then her only realistic option is to walk. Walking with a 5 year old any significant distance is difficult. And in New Orleans, there isn't a lot of high ground. Portions are below sea level, and even if you're on high ground, a good wave can still knock you down and wash you away.

2. Willingness to escape. You're in Florida, you probably see some of this. Many people in the area are not properly afraid of hurricanes. Most have lived through several and have few if any problems. Hurricanes are a way of life there, just like wildfires are here. So people assume (obviously incorrectly) that they'll be just fine.

Note that I'm not trying to excuse her actions, just explain them.

 

I bet it's also the fault of all those bedridden senior citizens who somehow couldn't manage to tread water, or the folks at Charity on ventilators who somehow couldn't manage to breathe on their own when the generators gave out and the ventilator quit.

I guess what you're advocating is some sort of Jungle Law or Survival of the Fittest. Remember that in that situation, those who represent Authority - eg a badge and gun - are the first ones gunned down.

I suppose you also blame a child for not being strong enough to resist getting raped? You must have nothing but contempt for the Victims.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jtullos @ Aug 21 2006, 05:04 PM) [snapback]306987[/snapback]</div>

Thats good old, bad old Human Nature. Living in a flood plain is plumb crazy - this is the warning - no building (Rich & Poor) in the way of Hurricanes - no more insurance from Uncle Sam. Imagine the politicians trying to sell that in those Gulf towns.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Aug 21 2006, 10:19 PM) [snapback]307247[/snapback]</div>

The doctors and the nurses should be held accountable because the electricity supply was cut out and the generators ran out of fuel?

You have got to be joking. These dedicated professionals did all they could with what little they had while waiting for the rescuers the administration so incompetently was delayed in dispatching.

 

You're totally right. She should have done as she was told.

She should have taken her five year old and walked to the Stadium. She and her daughter could be locked up in the dark for several days without water, food, toilets and possible beaten or raped.

How many people, including children died at that Stadium waiting for the buses to arrive? We know there were some rapes and a murder. Was it their fault for being stupid enough to wait there in the dark as there were told? (Weren't they prevented from leaving once they got there?)

Obviously it was all her fault.

Social Darwinism.

Maybe we should just set up gas chambers and take care of all of our social problems. If you can't/won't work and you are sucking on the government's teat...in you go. That will certainly take care of welfare. No loss there as they're probably genetically stupid anyway...no potential....no possibility they'll contribute to society to any extent. I mean....it's their own fault they're not pulling themselves up by the own bootstaps, right? It's their own fault they don't have a job. Serves them right for having kids they can't afford...or getting sick and losing their jobs...or getting laid off...or being too stupid to get a real good job with decent wages and healthcare. Get rid of everyone that can't pull their weight. Why stop there? Get rid of the infirm and mentally retarded. They'll never contribute, only suck up resources. Why even save babies with birth defects? Imagine the money we'll save if we allow hospitals to turn away anyone that doesn't have insurance. After all....if they were smart they'd have insurance. If they had a decent job, they'd have insurance. Since they have neither....they're a drain on society. Get rid of them. Hand them the stone soap. And while we're at it....how about the elderly? They're going to be draining the coffers for meds and healthcare for years. People are living longer now. Time to take care of that baby boomer population. What should the cut off point be? 80? 75? Of course we could solve that pesky social security problem by making it 65. Or maybe just telling people that as long as they work they're safe. When they retire...it's soap time. Gee, we could develop a master Amerikan race. Get rid of the blind. Get rid of the deaf. Maybe even institute IQ tests to determine who lives and who dies. That way Amerika will consist entirely of only the smartest. We won't be wasting our resources educating inferior thinkers. Think how much money that would save? Teaching would be so much easier if every had at least, say a 100 I.Q. Or maybe even 120 just to be on the safe side. And we'll have to take care of the physically challenged. I mean losing a finger or a toe doesn't have much impact...but all those people in wheelchairs. We'll have to do something about them, especially if they don't make enough money to support themselves. Too bad about those returning servicemen who've lost arms and legs or have serious head injuries. Tough break. I guess they should have been more careful. But hey....it will certainly solve the military's budget problems. And why should the handicapped get reserved, premium parking? If they can afford a handicapped van they can walk...er...roll from the far side of the parking lot like the rest of us. No more special treatment. We can save costs on ramps and drinking fountains. And everyone can use all of the stalls in the bathroom.

Hmmm. Maybe we should reread A Modest Proposal. That would certainly take care of Food Stamps.

A Modest Proposal.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Aug 21 2006, 08:33 PM) [snapback]307205[/snapback]</div>

Well, in that case don't limit yourself to flood plains. No one should live anywhere a tornado may come down either. And anyone on the east coast that could be hit with a hurricane should move. And of course, anyone that lives where an earthquake may cause damage. Or a volcano. Or an avalanche, rock slide, mud slide or brushfire. No one would live in an area of drought either.

Now we'll have to determine how much of Amerika is left for people to relocate too. Then we'll have to reserve the best land for the wealthy. And of course everyone gets to pick over what's left. They must pay for their new land, house and pay their own relocation costs.

What do we do with those that refuse to move? Shoot them?

 

People who live in poverty have little money and often little hope when faced with something like Katrina. Even if everyone of them went out and got a degree, would there be a high paying job for all of them? There has to be different levels in any society. That doesn't mean that we should treat the individuals on the lower soc/eco rungs like they are dispensible. They are someone's mother, son, friend.

I agree with most of the reasons posted here for why they did not leave, money for gas, lack of a vehicle, not wanting to leave a pet, a family home and belongings. We live in a sad world where so many are unable to imagine themselves in another's shoes.

There was a sad and pathetic response from FEMA after Katrina went through. Food and water drops could have been done. Evacuations and National Gaurd forces should have been there as soon as the weather cleared. Property owners have abandoned their land or selling it off at a loss, leaving low income renters without housing. Even those with insurance may never recover, jobs that were already not great there have shrunk even further.

I am watching the Spike Lee special tonight on HBO. Not necessarily a big fan and I have mixed feelings about what should be done about this area but I just want to see. I don't really believe that we should fight so hard with nature. Let her have this land back, we don't belong here.