Psycho-Babble Politics | about politics | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: ?? Dinah

Posted by alexandra_k on November 3, 2005, at 17:48:01

In reply to Re: ?? alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2005, at 16:37:17

> Didn't you read the link I sent?

Yes, I read it. And that is one story and I have also heard many others... That is one source, Dinah. Local news is one tiny little set of American news which is still one little set when compared with international news sources.

>Or heard what I said about two sides of the canal being built differently?

Yeah. Sounds like they got to building it properly and then got to not building it properly. Or vice versa...

> There's something that stinks to high heaven, but it's local not national.

I heard that engineers predicted that this was going to happen if money wasn't spent on upgrading pronto. That that was presented to congress? And it was going to happen, congress (or whoever) were in fairly much unanomous support of it. But in a state of national emergency (war basically) the president is allowed to over-ride congress. And that by declaring war on Iraq... He was allowed to over-ride congress and that that is why teh engineers were in Iraq instead of being in New Orleans designing improvements to teh dam. Because good engineers are a scarce resource, Dinah. And they were in Iraq and not in New Orleans.

(excuse my ignorance congress might be the wrong term)

Is this false?

I'm wary of potential scapegoating...
Blaming New Orleans for the tragedy is one way for the government to say they are justified in leaving them to deal with the situation with less government support. Blame someone on the local level and try and use that to absolve the government from responsibility to its citizens...

> On the other hand, regardless of where the money's going (because not all our money is going to Iraq, you know),

I do know. But I also know the money that went to Iraq... Well... That would probably keep NZ going for the next 10 years or so...

Just imagine the fancy canal you guys could have built with that money. Imagine the social services that could be put in place. Imagine the new homes and schools and community centres and churches that money could have built for New Orleans. All that stuff wouldn't have brought back the dead. Wouldn't have erased teh traumatic memories. But it would have helped. It would have helped immenseley.

> I think the US is going to write off New Orleans. President Bush's administration has pretty much said they're going to rebuild to Category 3 levels only. They're also not going to spend the dollars that need to be spent to build up the marshes. Without the marshes, we're a coastal city. We can't survive as a coastal city. We're too low. So at this point, I'd say that anyone who comes back to New Orleans or who stays here does so without national help and without much care from the government.

I think that sounds terrible :-(

I think... The role of government is to serve the people. I think they should think very carefully about whether it is a better service to the people to have them rebuild vs relocate. I think that decision should be made democratically. Do you think that sounds right, or do you not think that is part of the role of government?

> But I don't think it has anything to do with race or income. I think it just has to do with the fact that they just don't care.

You don't think that the fact that they don't care might have something to do with income? I'm serious here. I don't particularly want to get on the race bandwagon... But it is true that more black people are poor than white people. Auntiemel said something like 60% of New Orleans population is Black. Were around 40% of people in the dome white - or much less than that? Was the average income of those people very much lower than the average income of the population as a whole? I have to say... I think that is why they don't care. Because the wealthy are probably better off out. They will be okay (traumatised clearly - but okay). But what about the poor? What are they going to do? Continue to live in New Orleans with lack of public services? I'm sure the other states are welcoming them with arms open wide (joke).

I dunno Dinah...

There was a comment... Something about america being stronger after this... I have heard comments... About how very much that sounded like the country is better off after some elimination of the 'unsuccessful' went on...

> if we're not important to them, we're not important and we'll have to do whatever we have to do to look after ourselves.

Yeah. And personally - I don't think that is fair. Thats what frightens me about american individualism. That attitude. I don't think that is acceptable. Its when people are confronted with that attitude that they feel all the more justified in turning to crime or whatever in order to make a living to make ends meet in the face of an uncaring nation (when considered at the policy level)

> Or else lose all our investment in our homes and businesses and just leave the city, like it looks like the feds just as soon we do.

Yeah. It is okay if you can afford to cut your lossed I suppose. For those who were struggling to make it just out of poverty... They are back into poverty.

And for those who were in poverty to start with... What are they going to do?





Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Politics | Framed

poster:alexandra_k thread:574039