September 19, 2005
An Expanded View of Security
“Starve the beast,” conservatives have been advising us for several decades. Ronald Reagan told us that the government is not the solution, that the government is the problem. Both Bushes have been following this philosophy - until 9/11. Then, George W. Bush decided that the “beast” is needed primarily for maintaining security; he boosted the military and “starved” everything else. Katrina crashed into New Orleans and demonstrated that the old view of security is wrong. Many of the “starved” sectors are needed to keep our people - all the people - secure.
Grover Norquist, the super-conservative, said that we should:
"get the federal government down to the size where we can drown it in a bathtub."
We did reduce government. However, the government did not drown. People drowned. The poor people of New Orleans drowned. The sick and infirm people of New Orleans drowned. The black people of New Orleans drowned. Many people on the Gulf in Mississippi and Alabama drowned. A million people who did not drown were made homeless.
After 9/11, in the name of national security, we had increased defense and the military. The defense budget for 2006 is about $419 billion. Some commentators maintain that the true cost of the military sector is double this amount. While we gorged the military, we "starved" the rest of the "beast."
Because we "starved the beast" by reducing environmental measures, we ruined the wetlands. By doing so, the wetlands no longer can act as a buffer to reduce the violence of hurricanes. By crippling environmental regulations and not increasing car fuel efficiency, we increased global warming. Global warming did not bring Katrina, but it definitely made the Gulf warmer, which increased the fury of the hurricane.
Because we "starved the beast" by neglecting the building of a solid, dependable disaster communication system, coordination among local, state and federal officials was stymied in the resurrection of New Orleans after Katrina hit. All those involved said so.
Because we "starved the beast" by neglecting the planning of a dependable disaster transportation system, too many people could not be evacuated from New Orleans. The rich made it on their own. The poor were stuck.
Because we "starved the beast" by not having a disaster health care plan for saving the sick, many of these people died in hospitals. Because we do not have a universal health care system that serves all people, many people will, as a result, die in future Katrinas.
Because we "starved the beast" by reducing money for education, many people in New Orleans were not well informed and did not know how to save themselves and how to contact other people for help. Uneducated people make disaster relief hard.
Because we "starved the beast" by not helping working people - by not increasing the minimum wage, for instance - many people lived in miserable ghettos that disintegrated, drowning some and causing others to drift aimlessly.
Real security depends upon having an integrated infrastructure ready to protect our people - all of them. Military capabilities are, of course, essential. However, the following previously-neglected areas of security are needed as well:
- DISASTER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM - Our country boasts so many communication technologies. But what we need is one communication system that lights up at the advent of a disaster, made by man or by nature, and then is constantly available until no longer needed. We need more than technology. We need an excellent plan for coordination of all necessary military and disaster mitigation people
- DISASTER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM - We know a good trasportation system is a boon to military preparedness. This is one reason we have the interstate highway system. We need such a system for all types of disasters. With a good disaster transportation system in place, all, or at least most, of the poor people of New Orleans would have been evacuated in time. We must be ready in the future to be able to transport people quickly from almost anywhere in the country to anywhere else - fast
- ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SECURITY - We haven't been thinking of the environment as being important in the maintenance of our security. However, a healthy environment is of strong importance. Maintaining a healthy environment would prevent many poor people from getting lung and stomach ailments and cancers. Keeping the marshes and the tiny islands of the wetlands healthy could have softened the New Orleans disaster. The same is true of other areas of the country, such as California's delta. Improving air and water quality can keep us safe from a different type of disaster: a disease epidemic
- PERSONAL HEALTH SECURITY - People die from many things. Extremely few die from the actions of terrorists. Some die from natural disaster, as we see in New Orleans. But many people die because they do not have access to health care. About 45 million don't have health insurance. A Universal Health System that serves the needs of all of us - rich and poor alike - is what we need to prevent many avoidable deaths
- EDUCATION SECURITY - I know we have an educational system for everybody. But the system serves the rich a lot better than the poor. The poor attend dilapidated schools that look more like prisons than schools. The instruction they get is inferior. We need to provide the same good education to the poor that we provide to the rich. Every person should have education security, not only so he or she may obtain gainful employment, but to know what to do in the case of a disaster
- JOB SECURITY - When you listen to the black Katrina victims, you realize that some of them are in such dire straits because they are unemployed and unemployable. We must build a system where everyone can be trained to do higher and higher levels of jobs. And those people who can absorb only a limited amount of training, should be guaranteed a job that pays for life's necessities - a minimum wage at or above the poverty level
Katrina tells us we must have an expanded view of security.
Posted by Paul Siegel at September 19, 2005 06:32 PMPaul,
Do these “victims” carry any responsibility at all?
There are two types of victims, ones who can help themselves and do not, and those who cannot help themselves.
I have little sympathy for those that have the ability to do something about their situation and just do nothing. I do not think it’s the government’s responsibility to take care of these type of people.
However, there are people who cannot provide for themselves and are incapacitated in some way. I believe that government; society and individuals (me) need to take extra special care of these people.
My question is this, how many people who stayed in NO were in each category?
Government does not always produce the result you want, no matter how much money you spend on it and at some points it begins to produce negative returns.
In the case of Katrina, all levels of government failed. It was only when the military arrived that the government response improved. The local government had sufficient resources to evacuate the people, but didn’t use the busses at its disposal. The state government had sufficient resources to allow the National Guard to relief New Orleans, but it didn’t act. The Federal government had sufficient resources but didn’t act quick enough. It was not a shortage of money. Much smaller and less well-funded governments responded as well or better both historically and during this disaster. Little Gulf Port did well. Big New Orleans didn’t.
The beast isn’t starving.
Re education – there is no correlation between money spent and results achieved. Washington DC spends more per capita than any place else and barley produces literacy. Utah and Wyoming produce excellent results without much money.
The best isn’t starving, it is just doing the wrong things.
What worked well during this disaster were private firms and NGOs. You might recall that NGOs and private firms were actually turned away by government agencies. And you want more of this.
Posted by: jack at September 19, 2005 10:14 PMExcellent article, Paul.
Jack:
“The local government had sufficient resources to evacuate the people, but didn’t use the busses at its disposal.”
This is a rightwing myth. There were never sufficient busses to evacuate all the people from New Orleans, but Nagin probably did save many people by using the busses he could get to pick people up and bring them to the Super Dome.
“The state government had sufficient resources to allow the National Guard to relief New Orleans, but it didn’t act.”
Wrong. Blanco did act, however, the president and FEMA didn’t act at all (because really they didn’t have enough experience to know what the hell they were doing). Also, there was the lack of national guard troops the Fed’s might have called on for assistance from the surrounding states, but too many were busy serving in Iraq.
I know it’s very hard these days, but it really is so important to try to tell the lies from the truth.
“The Federal government had sufficient resources but didn’t act quick enough. It was not a shortage of money.”
In this case, I agree. The Fed’s certainly received plenty of money for their Dept. of Homeland Security, but never had enough brains or experience to actually make it function. When I say that, I am including the president, who now says things like:
“I want to know how to better cooperate with state and local government, to be able to answer that very question that you asked: Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack or another severe storm? And that’s a very important question.”
Doh! Well, at least now the man is aware of the bloody question, eh? Meanwhile, another hurricane - Rita - is about to head into the overly warm waters of the Gulf and they’re saying that New Orleans may be hit again, or perhaps Galveston, or Houston may get it this time.
PS to Stephen Daughtery, will your city be evacuating do you think?
I should point out that these Private Firms never had the resources to help that many people. At most, Walmart picked a corner and setup shop in that corner alone.
As for the Red Cross, I always remember the nonstop bashing the Right gave the Red Cross for doing its job at Guantanamo. I suppose the Red Cross is like the UN for the GOP. Its only relevant if they doing what you want.
Posted by: Aldous at September 20, 2005 12:04 AMMediamatters.org? Woohoo, unbiased reporting at its best!
Nice.
Posted by: Rhinehold at September 20, 2005 12:23 AM“There are two types of victims, ones who can help themselves and do not, and those who cannot help themselves.
I have little sympathy for those that have the ability to do something about their situation and just do nothing. I do not think it’s the government’s responsibility to take care of these type of people.”
Typical ill-informed conservative clap-trap. Have you ever even looked at the national budget? Are you aware of how little we spend out of our discretionary spending on “those people”?
The bulk of our spending ends up directly in the hands of the wealthy and connected. Look at the PORK BARREL transportation bill. Look at defense contracts. Look at agriculture subsidies. Look at … Oh one could go on and on regarding the welfare for the wealthy. The lion’s share by far. You aren’t talking about cutting your grandma’s Medicare are you? Or are you just fed up with paying for food and healthcare for infants of socially irresponsible people. You don’t mind those folk’s children growing up and becoming adults who don’t know how to function so that it perpetuates forever. What is your solution? Forced sterilization? Internment camps? Exile? Come on, recommend something. Only don’t act like you don’t benefit from government spending. From doctor’s to lawyers, to construction to engineers… without government contracts, the pie starts shrinking fast. And don’t tell me how we ALL benefit from that type of spending. Spent is spent and money is put into circulation. You just want it in your circles.
Posted by: Rick at September 20, 2005 12:29 AMRhinehold:
“Mediamatters.org? Woohoo, unbiased reporting at its best!”
Hey Elliotbay, check it out… he went right to Rightwing Debate Tactic rule # 2! :^)
Rhinehold, small tip: try checking out the links Mediamatters have provided, in addition to reading their articles, mmmkay?
Posted by: Adrienne at September 20, 2005 01:03 AMBob,
Your argument about the people staying in N.O. may of been a good on IF Katrina was what did the damage; however, the storm did not cause the problem. Recheck your facts, a levee broke and sent a wall of water rushing through the city. Because this event happened after the strom had passed, the city was caught flat footed.
No, downsizing our government to the point that it can not respond to a major problem is dangerous. Katrina showed that flaw. For what would of happened to N.O. if the levees broke 24 hours later? Even now we have people staying in Key West and will probably be safe. People living in Tornado Alley will probably be safe this spring. Nevertheless, when a 10 foot wall of water breaks loose because a wall of a levee breaks running is not an option. The only hope you have is that our government has enough equipment to get you out of harms way. And IMO they did not show that to be the case this time on any level.
Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 20, 2005 01:18 AMA very nice post.
One note. You are no doubt correct in your estimate of many of the NOLA survivors.
When you listen to the black Katrina victims, you realize that some of them are in such dire straits because they are unemployed and unemployable.
But you go on to ignore a part of reality when you continue in your following sentences, We must build a system where everyone can be trained to do higher and higher levels of jobs. And those people who can absorb only a limited amount of training, should be guaranteed a job that pays for life’s necessities - a minimum wage at or above the poverty level.
Good, and that last bit almost gets us to the nub. Here it is. There is always a remainder of unemployable people nobody would want on site even to push a broom or put paper towels in the men’s room.
Though there may not be a single term sufficiently commodious to cover all their varied inadequacies, these people are, in however different ways, disabled. And they, too, need food, shelter, etc.
Google “vagabond’s wage”. Or “negative income tax”, or “guaranteed annual income”, or “guaranteed minimum income”.
And think how effective that would be as a floor on wages for everybody if instituted, not merely for those certified or qualified in some way, but for all people, “no questions asked.”
Now that’s a real minimum wage.
Posted by: Marcus Tullius Cicero at September 20, 2005 06:48 AMMarcus,
Maybe with the exceo of Tyco going to jail for 8-25 years the groundwork has been laid to start charging other companies from costing their corporation and stockholders megabucks is taxes so that they can live a “High Life” by paying such low wages to some employees.
Paul
Nobody is starving anybody…there are profound disagreements as to how accomplish that end,that’s all.
One segment of society believes the government should do that…the other believes that the private sector is much more efficient and can accomplish the job more effectively…herein is the rub.
Everybody…including the right…wants a better life for ALL Americans..better housing,education,health care,…..it is the way we achieve those goals that is in dispute.Consider this hypo for a moment (I know this one well ..it hits home):
A fifty something year old professional making $200,000 a year.After taxes (30% Fed,5% State)that leaves $130,000 (That’s 70,000 THOUSAND dollars in taxes!).Deduct another $27,000 for a home mortgage plus $4000 for LOCAL taxes,that leaves $99,000. Deduct another $15,000 for food for a family of five.That leaves $84,000.Deduct another $15,000 for car payment,auto insurance,gasoline,that leaves $69,000.Deduct another $12,000 for health insurance.That leaves $57,000.Deduct another $5000 to cloth a family of five.That leaves $52,000.Deduct another $2500 for life insurance.That leaves $49,500.
From that $49,000 I have to pay THREE college tuitions (UMass,where my eldest attends is $15,000 a year,Salem State,wher my middle one attends is $9,000 a year.Art School for my little one is $16,000).
Exactly how should I spend the remaining $9000?(forget credit card bills,an occasionial night out…heaven fordid..a vacation..or …..saving money for my retirement….where do I cut?If you raise my taxes one cent I am near destitute…and I earn in the top 1%….Buy the way,I am a small business man and employee 8…I go under…..so do they…..
Enough on taxes.
Sic Eagle,
Wow, you’re close to starving and you make 200,000 a year! Think how much worse off people who only make $100,000 a year are! Or even the destitute poor who only make $50,000 per year!
You know, your story fails to inspire any sympathy in me whatsoever. Considering that your discretionary income is almost double what I make (gross), and I manage to have two cars, house, family of four, extremely large medical bills and nutritious food, your trials make me realize just how selfish rich people actually are. If you feel like you are going to “go under” maybe you could buy a less expensive car? Or even, heaven forbid, a used one? You don’t mean “go under” you mean “slightly adjust my lifestyle.” Considering that many working people can’t afford to spend time with their kids because they have to work two jobs to pay rent and food to live in a crime-ridden neighborhood, I think that helping out a little more may be a small sacrifice.
Posted by: Brian Poole at September 20, 2005 09:24 AMLOL! SE, I wish I had all the problems that come with making $200k. :)
Good article Paul. I don’t think the “starve the beast” scenario is actually valid anymore. Republicans discovered you can cut taxes (then cut ‘em some more), but still keep all the social programs that get you re-elected. They just make up the difference by mortgaging the American Dream to China.
Posted by: American Pundit at September 20, 2005 10:22 AM“I think that helping out a little more may be a small sacrifice”
So it would be fair to say the leftists should lead by example then. Why don’t you guys practice what you preach.
Instead of forcing others to finance YOUR feel good schemes, why don’t YOU all make some small sacrifices and alter YOUR lifestyles in order to support what YOU feel is the right thing to do?
But no, you want “everbody” to support what YOU think is best.
You guys concentrate on what SE makes, but totally neglect how much he contributes, typical.
Must be an election coming up.
An expanded view of security?
Hell, our once great country would be a 100 times better off if people would quit depending on the govt to take care of them.
SE,
Having been both incredibly poor and very rich, and having seen both sides I find it very hard to sympathize with your “plight”. It’s a bit rich to complain about how little money you have when you have a 2,250 mortgage I’m guessing at least two cars and probably pretty nice ones at that (guess by your car payment even taking out a generous amount for insurance and gas), and are sending 3 kids to college. Come back and complain when you have no idea how to send your kids to college, or have to make the choice between food or heat. Feel free to complain when you subsist on the $1 sales in grocery stores.
This gets to what divides left from right. Right believe that they don’t owe anyone, “Buy[sic] the way,I am a small business man and employee 8…I go under…..so do they…..
Enough on taxes.” whereas the left believes they owe everyone under the sun, even those who don’t deserve it. The real solution is somewhere in the middle. The left needs to realize that it’s fool hardy to try and help everyone. The right needs to realize that while they complain that “If you raise my taxes I’m going to lay off workers” makes little economic sense (economy is the modern day Karma), and that you can’t throughout the baby with the bathwater. Just because there are some vagrants doesn’t mean you should just not help anyone, this coming from “Err on the side of life.” party.
Lastly about taxes. I’d support a tax hike IF I knew it would pay of the deficit, call it a deficit tax and repeal it when it’s paid off. The right are always complaining about taxes, however, our children deserve better than what we’re giving them. While lowering taxes MIGHT grow the economy a little to pay off the deficit, raising taxes (just a smidge) WILL pay off the deficit (if done correctly). Given the state of our budget I’d rather take the bird in the hand.
Posted by: chantico at September 20, 2005 11:04 AMOh and before it gets misconstrued as anything else, the only reason I’d support a tax hike isn’t to support the poor. It’s to pay off Bush’s war and the worst natural disaster in a hundred years.
Posted by: chantico at September 20, 2005 11:12 AMBrian.Pundit et al.
I pretty much expected the response.
I work ,what 100 hours a week…seven days a week.
I create 8 jobs…all paying taxes..and decent jobs too..average pay for my emplowees is $15.oo/hr plus benefits….yet I am castigated as living a luxury lifestyle?I drive a 4 year old car.I live in a condo in the Northeast?That’s luxury?
Compare to what?Kerry’s place in Boston or Kennedy’s down the Cape?
My grandparents immigrated from Sicily 80 years ago…worked in the sweatshops of Massuchusetts trying to make a better life…they instilled one thing in us…the value of an education.Period.
I worked my way thru college,then law school…working full time too.All my kids know the value of a buck too..they always worked summers and throuought the school year.
I never collected unemployment,welfare,medicaid,food stamps not one cent from the govenrment,local,stater of Federal.
Yet you mock me.
Why don’t we completely redistribute everything I have?
My values are different than yours..I was taught to abhor the dole.
America has always been the land of opportunity.
This year alone I donated thousands..thousands…to the needy.
You castigate me because I bootstrapped myself up from povery and instill in my kids the value of hard work and education bringing rewards?If that be the case,our counrty really is in trouble with the like of you,I think
Hard work and education were the key.
Sadly today we(all of us failed on this).Now we have the MTV generation.Rappers have hit songs about violating women,killing police.Every video store on the corner peddles pornograhy.I see small grocery stores everywhere that accept food stams wink at the customer as they accept food stamps for alcohol,cigerates and the like.I see three generations of folks here in the Norheast never work one day in their life,yet they have a ph.d is beating the system.
This is on my back..and the countless hard working men and women who also shoulder this burder.
How dare you say I live an oppulent life.
One more thing…
I thank the Lord every day for all that he has bestowed on me too.
I suppose I will be called a religious fanatic now as well by some of you folks.
Well, I bite back.
I can dish it out every bit as well as I can take it…street kids are like that…..street kids that become Republicians,that is.
Again SE, there went the baby with the bath water. I too am the son of immigrants, my father came here for a life worked and still works incredibly hard for every dollar. I too worked hard to put myself through college. Never did I or my family accept welfare, although there were times when we could have used it. And like you I too am outraged when I see people abusing the system and want true reform. In fact, like you I too disagree with most of what the blog has to say. We need true reform that puts people to work, and punishes people for taking advantage of the system.
I don’t take any issue with you having a few deserved possessions. However, I do take issue at you complaining about money. I haven’t forgotten what it’s like to be dirt poor, to work 80 hours a week to just scrape by. Also don’t forget when I was poor I shouldered the burden too (at a rate of 30% by the way). If my share of the burden goes to someone who actually needs help to help them rebuild their life and become a contributing citizen then I’m glad. I’ll give you that the system needs to be overhauled, however again we see that I don’t owe anyone mentality. That will never fix things, same as the mentality that “let’s take care of everyone and sing kumbaya!”. The two sides need to meet in the middle for the common good.
Posted by: chantico at September 20, 2005 11:49 AMSic Eagle,
I expected your response, too.
I didn’t mock you for being rich, I mocked you for saying that you were barely making it and would “go under”.
Nothing was ever said negatively about your hard work or education. I think that’s great. My dad made me put in the same fence 4 times on our farm, just so I would learn the joy of working (It kept the cows in the first time, by the way). I also worked my way through life and college, as did many other people.
I don’t begrudge you your lifestyle. But to say you have it hard is ridiculous. Even if you do work 100 hour weeks, you do that by your own choice. I come close to that, mostly because I like my job. Lots of people work like that to survive. More can’t get work that will let them have more than 30 hours a week, so they have no health care.
I make much less than you, but I also gave thousands to the needy, in addition to large chunks of time mentoring kids (yes, KCTim, I could have a better life in a material sense if I stopped doing this).
Yes, some people scam the system. Many more don’t. I don’t mind giving some help to people in need, or people that my help will allow to learn the values that you’re talking about. How is a child going to do well in school if he is sick, or if he has no parental support because his single mom works all the time? You’re paying 16,000 a year for your little one to go to Art school. How can you think that education is important if you don’t see any hope of ever affording community college?
I’m not a big fan of welfare. I like welfare reform. I like how my church does it, where you do what work you can to recieve assistance, and pay it back when you can. I would love to see a government work program replace welfare (one for poor people, not the president’s college buddies). However, I can’t stand seeing rich guys complain about how hard they have it, when so many people have it so much harder.
Chantico,
Excellent post
Sicilian Eagle,
While $200,000.00/yr may seem like alot of money to AP and Brian, I have no problem allowing small business owners having tax incentives. Nevertheless, tax cuts for an employee making that kind of money needs to be removed. The difference is you are adding to the positive fucntion of society, the employee is removing from the positive function of society.
For example, the payroll taxes for your employees. 8 @ $10.00/hr= $80.00/hr worth of revenue that most be meet by sales. Now, add the approx. $8.00/hr payroll taxes for each employee and thats another $64.00/hr of revenue. Which means your business must make on average $144.00/hr or $1,152.00 a day and that is before you get paid a dime. However, the employee getting paid the same amount of money a year simple gets paid approx. $548.00 a day for just showing up. The difference is risk and responsibility.
You both pay $70,000.00/yr in federal and state taxes, yet the employee has no responsibilty to give back to his/her community. However, by Law your corporation is required to do just that. Although I can’t remember the exact term, the local and state government holds the action of you and your employees accountable. A huge risk if one of your employees does something real dumb and even in the event like Katrina, the Community Elders look at you for help.
No, Congress does need to revisit this part of the “Tax Cut” for several good reasons. Among them are;
1) Small Business Owners need to be given Tax Credits at a $1.00 for $1.00 exchange for increasing each employee(s) wage making under and up to $15.00/hr. Additionally, because this will increase the owners responsibility for higher payroll taxes Congress needs to offset this by lowering the percentage of taxes owed due to the increase. In this manner all parties, the Individual, the Company, & the Government can see the progress made by their efforts. Granted not All Employees deserve a raise; nevertheless, the best person to make that judgment call is the employer not a regulator in Washington D.C.
2) The employee making $200,000.00 plus/yr. should have the opition of allowing their income to be taxed an additonal 15% or elect to have the increase go toward the purchase of U.S. Federal Reserve “Specail” Teasury Notes. This $20,000.00/yr investment incentive would produce an annual revenue of $2 Billion dollars plus per 100,000 employees either through the sell of “Notes” or in taxes.
3) Tax Incentives need to be given to both the Employer and the Employees who wish to invest in Local and State Bonds for such things as low income housing and schools. Since most of this citizens are involved in their community already, this incentive package would allow their local/state non-profits and governments to meet the growing demands of all of its citizens.
No, I have got a problem with the way both the Democrats and Republicans want to split the difference on taxing everyone; however, here is just a few quick ideas that I thought of off the top of my head. Others tax incentives should include going “Totally Green.” Creating/Expanding businesses to produce “Green Products and Services.” And most of all any action by Congress should include a nice tax credit for redefining the way an Employer and Employee look at what puts money in their hands. I almost want to scream at the waste I still see everyday at so many businesses that it is not funny. Aperson doesn’t need 20 napkins to eat one hamburger do they?
Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 20, 2005 12:13 PMRhinehold: “Mediamatters.org? Woohoo, unbiased reporting at its best!”Hey Elliotbay, check it out… he went right to Rightwing Debate Tactic rule # 2! :^)
Rhinehold, small tip: try checking out the links Mediamatters have provided, in addition to reading their articles, mmmkay?
Did that, got the T-shirt.
But, since you want to deflect again by accusing me of being a republican (lol, I love the Straw Man tactic, accuse your opponent of X and then attack them for that position) let’s take a look at the ‘2000 busses’ for example.
Where there 2000 busses ready for use? Probably not. Did that mean that the mayor was right not to use the busses that were THERE?
So, what you are doing is saying that the number 2000 was wrong. Yet, why didn’t they use the 300+ that were there? Or just 50? Or even 1? The whole time mayor Nagin was on TV asking for help there were unused busses sitting there. Someone on Thursday finally broke into the lot where they were locked up, stole one and drove it to the convention center.
The *FACT* is that the mayor was overwhelmed, the governor was incompetent and the federal government didn’t notice this was going to pot soon enough to do what they should have done. I don’t know why people are so willing to put the blame on one side and not the other here, it’s a massive failure on all levels. I even posted this last week just to be attacked for not being hard enough on the federal government and too hard on the local as if I was giving the feds a clean check! The mindnumbing partisanship by so many these days is starting to make me disgusted…
As for Mediamatters.org, if I were to post a bunch of links to Drudge or Fox News, you would go out of your way to point out how biased they are and no one should listen to them. And they don’t make it their mission statement to be a ‘conservative misinformation counterpiece’, do they?
Yeah, I’m just another ‘republican’ wingnut that you can safetly ignore, right? Meaning, I don’t think Howard Dean is the savior of the left so I must be right-wing, right?
Posted by: Rhinehold at September 20, 2005 12:42 PMEagle is full of it with the $200k and 35% taxes ‘stuff’. First of all, a mortgage and RE tax is deductible leaving $169k minus the other deductibes, bringing you easily into 26% territory and what about medicare etc… And a $2500 a month mortgage (or appx $450k @ 30yr/5.5%) only paying $4k in RE Tax? Try $12k. And $1500 a month for food? Sorry, the example is garbage.
Posted by: Dave at September 20, 2005 12:53 PMRhinehold:
“But, since you want to deflect again by accusing me of being a republican”
I’m aware you’re not a Republican Rhinehold, but I was accusing you of using Rightwing Debate Tactic #2 because quite obviously you were.
“So, what you are doing is saying that the number 2000 was wrong. Yet, why didn�t they use the 300+ that were there?”
From my first link (you can go back and check their link to verify the accuracy of this):
“According to a September 5, 2003, article in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, “The [Orleans Parish school] district owns 324 buses but 70 are broken down.”Everyone keeps mentioning that parking lot full of school busses that ended up under water, but who knows how many of those school busses were in working order before the hurricane? I certainly don’t, but I do realize that city budgets all across America have been slashed to the bare bones for a long time now. There may have been a great many more than 70 of them that were broken down since 2003. At any rate, that number wouldn’t have been enough to get all the residents to safety.
While estimates of the number of residents stranded in New Orleans following the storm vary, New Orleans officials have suggested that 80 percent of the city’s residents evacuated before the hurricane hit. That leaves roughly 97,000 residents who remained in New Orleans.New Orleans’ combined fleet of public transit and school buses would not have had nearly enough capacity to evacuate all of those who remained in the city. A July 8 Times-Picayune article, titled “RTA buses would be used for evacuation; But plan still falls far short of needs,” pointed out that the RTA owned 364 public buses. “Even if the entire fleet was used,” the Times-Picayune noted, “the buses would carry only about 22,000 people out of the city — far short of the 134,000 people estimated to be without cars in a recent University of New Orleans study.” Even the addition of the full school bus fleet would have been far from sufficient to transport the remaining residents.
“Did that mean that the mayor was right not to use the busses that were THERE?”
Moreover, The New York Times noted that a number of New Orleans buses were in use as the hurricane approached: “But Chester Wilmot, an L.S.U. [Louisiana State University] civil engineering professor who studies evacuation plans, said the city successfully improvised. He said witnesses described seeing city buses shuttle residents to the Superdome before Hurricane Katrina struck.”
I don’t know how many busses Nagin used, or what number were school busses — and neither do any of you. But regardless of that fact, he is attacked anyway.
“The *FACT* is that the mayor was overwhelmed,”
No doubt he was. Btw, I’m not saying that Nagin did everything right during the lead up to, or following the hurricane. I was just pointing out that there were never enough busses to have gotten all the people who needed help out of the city before the hurricane struck.
“the governor was incompetent”
No, Blanco was not incompetent. It appears to me that she did everything she could in the lead up to the hurricane. She declared the state of emergency for her state on Aug 26.
As Gen. Russel Honor�, commander of the Department of Defense’s (DoD) Joint Task Force Katrina, stated in a September 1 briefing, the governors of Louisiana and Mississippi had requested additional assistance from the federal government “as the hurricane was approaching,” beginning with a request on August 26 that DoD command centers be set up in their states.
“and the federal government didn�t notice this was going to pot soon enough to do what they should have done.”
This is such a HUGE understatement.
“I don�t know why people are so willing to put the blame on one side and not the other here, it�s a massive failure on all levels.”
In my opinion, Nagin, the president and Homeland Security/FEMA can share blame for what happened, but not Blanco.
And the question remains, should we automatically hold a city mayor to the exact same standards during the largest natural disaster in American history as we should the President of the United States and Homeland Security/FEMA?
“As for Mediamatters.org, if I were to post a bunch of links to Drudge or Fox News, you would go out of your way to point out how biased they are and no one should listen to them.”
Their website may be biased, but their links don’t lie Rhinehold. Drudge and Fox News on the other hand, are masters at lying about practically everything.
Posted by: Adrienne at September 20, 2005 02:09 PM“should we automatically hold a city mayor to the exact same standards during the largest natural disaster in American history as we should the President of the United States and Homeland Security/FEMA?”
A higher standard Adrienne. Having lived through and dealt with the midwest floods of the 90’s, I can tell you without hesitation, that the most important people during a disaster are the community leaders.
They, the churches and the volunteers are what save lives. The feds only come in AFTER the fact and start paying people off.
Security starts with oneself, those who choose to depend on the govt are always the ones who suffer most.
Posted by: kctim at September 20, 2005 05:45 PMPeople
Musta been something you ate this morning..I swear.
Never once did I say I was broke…just the opposite..what I said was that further tax burdens would be ruinous to small business men like me and ultimately to my employees.
With three great kids,the good Lord smiled on me..everything else is gravy.
But geez,I think I chip in more than my fair share of taxes.
Paying 70 grand a year in taxes I think is enough for this guy….they had a revolution up here a few years ago over taxing tea,for crying out loud.
Henry
You have the best posts…..always well thought out and principled.
Dave
I will send you my shopping bills…try feeding 3 kids….Plus…if you are an accountant (mine charges me 7 grand a year) and can do better…well I will hire you then
kctim:
“A higher standard Adrienne. Having lived through and dealt with the midwest floods of the 90�s, I can tell you without hesitation, that the most important people during a disaster are the community leaders.
They, the churches and the volunteers are what save lives.”
I’m afraid I can’t agree. The Police, Firefighters, and several other local agencies are usually way more important in a citywide disaster situation than the community leader or some churches and volunteers. And indeed, as far as I can tell, having so many in his police force immediately desert was one of Mayor Nagin’s major problems even before the disaster — as was the fact that since the Fed’s began restructuring Homeland Security and FEMA all the rules had been in a state of constant flux, so that no one really seemed to know how things were supposed to work.
“The feds only come in AFTER the fact and start paying people off.”
Hate to say it, but this only shows that you don’t fully understand what FEMA’s role has been since it’s inception. It wasn’t called the Federal EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Agency for no reason, you know.
“Security starts with oneself, those who choose to depend on the govt are always the ones who suffer most.”
Yeah, yeah. I know, that’s the Libertarian view. Every man, woman and child for themselves.
I can’t begin to tell you how grateful I am that my family didn’t raise me to think that way.
Sicilian Eagle,
Thanks, I actually was written that post before you stated how much your average worker was paid. And like I said, the idea of using tax incentives to assist Small Business Owners to be able to pay theit employees and themselve more is better for America than just a tax cut without responsibility. Your $70,000.00 in taxes would be better spent given each employee and yourself a $7,777.78/ yr raise and than requiring part of it to be invested in Treasury Notes to build up our Nation’s Wealth plus their own.
I work ,what 100 hours a week…seven days a week.
Who doesn’t?
Adrienne
“It wasn’t called the Federal EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Agency for no reason, you know”
Yes, I know what FEMA stands for ma’am, but the reality of how it works is totally different than its name. They set up HQ’s around the area’s and do not go in until after the event.
“The Police, Firefighters, and several other local agencies are usually way more important in a citywide disaster situation than the community leader or some churches and volunteers”
The community leaders are in charge of the police, firefighters etc…, they dictate where they go and most of the disaster response forces are made up of volunteers, especially in smaller towns.
Churches are usually there for the people before the Red Cross and especially before FEMA.
“Yeah, yeah. I know, that’s the Libertarian view. Every man, woman and child for themselves.”
Please don’t read into what I said. I did not say “fend for themselves.” I said security STARTS with oneself. It is EVERYBODY’S responsibility to ensure they and their family are prepared. Sitting back, doing nothing and hoping the govt will do it for you doesn’t work, as Katrina just proved.
“I can’t begin to tell you how grateful I am that my family didn’t raise me to think that way.”
Thats the problem with most today, they have been led to believe that the govt will take care of them and have forgotten how to take care of themselves.
Posted by: kctim at September 21, 2005 09:17 AMkctim:
“the reality of how it works is totally different than its name. They set up HQ�s around the area�s and do not go in until after the event.”
Well Tim, the reality of FEMA during the Clinton administration under the direction of James Lee Witt had the agency moving into action before hurricanes — and he obviously knew how to coordinate with state and local authorities for large scale evacuations — because that’s exactly what they did before Hurricane Floyd.
But let’s just say it was supposed to worked the way you’re claiming it is — that would mean that FEMA should have gone in immediately after the hurricane to help get the poor, the sick, and the old people out of New Orleans, but Brown didn’t do that.
As the head of FEMA, Brown should have been the kind of smart experienced type of person needed for that job, who would have been aware that a category 5 storm surge would eventually cause a breach in the levees or canals of NO, and would have immediately moved his people in. Since he wasn’t that kind of person, he didn’t do anything at all. In fact, he couldn’t even manage to set up HQ’s beyond the cities until days after the event, despite the fact that Gov. Blanco given everyone plenty of warning by declaring the emergency days before the hurricane made landfall.
Meanwhile, the president, had he heeded the governors state of emergency, should have been immediately mobilizing the national guard from surrounding states, as well as the army, navy and coastguard for any and all rescue efforts. Instead, our president was traveling around the country — still on vacation the day after the hurricane.
In a court of law there is a name for such incompetence, it’s called negligent homicide.
�”The community leaders are in charge of the police, firefighters etc�, they dictate where they go”
Technically, you could say that, yes. But in reality, it’s usually the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief, and the heads of other agency’s who are the ones who end up dictating where their people will go during a serious emergency situation. I know this is true, because of the job my dad did. He didn’t call the mayor’s of the towns he needed to evacuate for various health reasons, he immediately called all of those people first (although it’s likely that at some point those people would have called their mayor to keep him up to speed on what they were already doing).
“and most of the disaster response forces are made up of volunteers, especially in smaller towns.”
I know that firefighters are very often all volunteer in smaller towns, but the police and other state agency workers wouldn’t be. And in the case of New Orleans, that isn’t at all what we’re talking about.
“Churches are usually there for the people before the Red Cross and especially before FEMA.”
While I’m sure the churches serve a very important purpose in disasters of all kinds, the fact that the governor declared the state of emergency on Aug 26 should have meant that the Red Cross and FEMA would have been directly involved in coordinating with each other as they quickly moblized for the tasks each faced. That didn’t happen for the city of New Orleans — before, or for a long time after, the hurricane and the flood.
“Please don�t read into what I said. I did not say �fend for themselves.� I said security STARTS with oneself. It is EVERYBODY�S responsibility to ensure they and their family are prepared. Sitting back, doing nothing and hoping the govt will do it for you doesn�t work, as Katrina just proved.”
Tim, the majority of these people were extremely POOR, SICK, OR OLD. Sometimes they were a combination of those three. I think it’s more than a little hard-hearted to say they should have better equipped and prepared themselves for this disaster when the truth is, these people were barely subsisting in their daily lives.
I feel that sometimes it’s necessary for the govt. (if we want to live in a moral country) to help people when they can’t help themselves. Random acts of kindness by churches and volunteers aren’t going to cut it — because they don’t have the money, the stucture, or the existing large scale organization to deal with such large numbers of people.
“Thats the problem with most today, they have been led to believe that the govt will take care of them and have forgotten how to take care of themselves.”
When it comes to helping the poor, I don’t think we get anywhere by being either too hard-hearted, or too permissive and weak by handing out our taxpayer dollars indefinitely. I strongly agree with last three things that Paul mentioned in the article that started this thread: giving access to Healthcare, to Education, and to Job Training is the best way to help poor people help themselves.
Posted by: Adrienne at September 21, 2005 11:41 AM“the reality of FEMA during the Clinton administration under the direction of James Lee Witt had the agency moving into action before hurricanes”
Before “average” disasters. Their response to the midwest floods was on par with what we just saw in New Orleans. I saw this firsthand.
I’m not using the clinton vs Bush thing either. Both responses were inadequate and hopefully, all learned from them and will be better prepared for the next of its type.
“But let’s just say it was supposed to worked the way you’re claiming it is — that would mean that FEMA should have gone in immediately after the hurricane to help get the poor, the sick, and the old people out of New Orleans, but Brown didn’t do that”
The levee’s didn’t break until after the hurricane. I would bet everybody went into the “whew” mode after the hurricane passed, relaxed some and were caught by surprise when the levee’s did break. Brown, the mayor, govenor and all public servants did not perform their duties to protect. They ALL failed and should be held accountable by the people.
“I think it’s more than a little hard-hearted to say they should have better equipped and prepared themselves for this disaster when the truth is, these people were barely subsisting in their daily lives”
The old and sick deserve all the help we can muster but the govt will never be able to help them all. It is always the people that do the most help.
Blaming one person and excusing others simply because of politics will not help anybody in future events.
“giving access to Healthcare, to Education, and to Job Training is the best way to help poor people help themselves”
EVERY American has access to these. You choose to believe that since its a Republican in office that these services are not offered or don’t get enough money and I choose to believe that most refuse to get them themselves because they feel govt should do everything for them. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle I guess.
Paul’s view of security is that of a govt babysitter and provider. Most of the country is already dependent on govt, but that is a mistake. We should depend on ourselves and our neighbors when disaster hits and expect the govt as a last resort.
The state of LA was expecting the fed govt to do everything. The city of NO was expecting the state to do everything. The people of NO was expecting their city leaders to take care of them.
Look where all that got them.
:^/ Well Tim, I see that once again we pretty much disagree all across the board on these subjects, so I won’t bother to beat dead horses…
Posted by: Adrienne at September 21, 2005 12:39 PMI know Adrienne.
I just wish everybody could see that there is plenty of blame for both sides.
With both sides blaming the other, nothing will get done and it will be the people that suffer and not the leaders they are blaming or defending.
Dead horses? How about a govt thats been dead for decades, thats what worries me the most.
“I just wish everybody could see that there is plenty of blame for both sides.”
Like I said to Rhinehold earlier, I do think blame may be shared by the Mayor and by the Fed’s — but to be perfectly honest, the incompetence of the Fed’s shocked me more. I guess because I thought they’d had more than enough time and plenty of money since 9/11 to have been preparing for just such a scenario.
“With both sides blaming the other, nothing will get done and it will be the people that suffer and not the leaders they are blaming or defending.”
I agree.
Posted by: Adrienne at September 21, 2005 03:11 PM“but to be perfectly honest, the incompetence of the Fed’s shocked me more”
Not me. I’ve seen it before and we all will see it again. The fed’s response to the great midwest floods of the 90’s had a big part in my dislike of clinton so I kind of understand where you guys are right now.
Posted by: kctim at September 21, 2005 04:49 PM
