Jump to content

Hurricane Katrina and New Orleans


Sknydpr
 Share

Recommended Posts

blaming the looters is simply tackling the symptoms of social decay.

jonathan

 

Even if I concede that point, stealing or looting is not a solution that gets to the root of the problem of social decay either.

 

Plus, I repeat all I said in my above post about the looters versus the innocent store owner. I dont think the rights of the looters outweigh his rights not to have his store looted after years of honest hard work and his right not to hve to pay more for insurance.

 

And yes, i agree that insurance companies suck and this is a reflection on just how badly they suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

fair enough, your uncle is justified in not giving anything way. but i am talking, in the main, about mega corps, who already screw everyone they can. from what i heard it was very much the walmarts that were getting looted.

 

insurance companies will use any excuse to hike the prices of their policies, and the price will go up after the hurricane as they are going to be prone to it. we need locally based non profit insurance organisations - ie everyone pays into an account, and should anything happen, money is paid out to those who pay in.

 

are we agreed that the main repercusion of looting is increased insurance premiums? if so, is that the only moral concern? i think it is. getting something for free is not the issue. these people are already heavily exploited and put far more into society than they get back. i argue that as the insurance premium is going to go up irrespective, that they might as well, as all the high tech consumer goods are most likely going to end up being washed away and useless.

 

to summarise my ramblings, insurance companies and mega corps are the main problem (not to mention the terrible exploitative capitalist free market) so looting is going to be a symptom of this. i argue that a society which respected everyone would have little or no looting in such situations. but since so many people are exploited, it is understandable that it happens.

 

to use a metaphor. take an abused wife. for years she has put up with verbal, physical and sexual abuse from her husband. one day, something snaps, and she shoots him. without understanding the circumstances, you would say that she killed him so is morally reprehensable. but seeing as she suffered so long it is excusable, though maybe not the best course of action. maybe she should have sought a divorce or non violent means. but in the end, the blame for the killing (and looting) lies on the shoulders of the abuser (husband/government/mega corp).

 

jonathan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Renee,

 

I think this may have been missed:

 

Has anyone discussed sending vegan food and supplies to the victims. Our agency is organizing a Katrina relief drive and they are requesting certain kinds of foods like cereals, MREs, canned food that don't need to be heated, etc. I'm trying to get people to donate vegan stuff as I'm sure a lot of what they get won't be.

Any ideas appreciated...

 

I've thought about this as well. I personally don't have much money, and neither does Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness, but I've also thought about Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness making a donation to the relief fund.

 

So I'll work on that locally and I can probably get lots of things donated.

 

Thanks for the reminder of a very good idea. I'm sure there are many many homeless animals too, who need food, shelter, beds (domestic animals who are used to them), and things like that.

 

I will start working on this right away. I'll gather up lots of vegan foods and supplies to send over.

 

-Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no crime is clear cut. i see nothing wrong in stealing from those who either have insurance or pay their workers so little that they leave them no choice. do you know that 2/3 of all armed robberies at mcdonalds are committed by staff/ex-staff. if the employers actually treated their staff with respect then they wouldnt have these problems.

of course the actions of business execs towards their staff arent legally crimes, so they get off, free of any punishment, taking all the wealth.

 

if you believe that a crime is a crime irrespective of personal circumstances or econonic pressures, then you really should join the army or police.

 

i think that all businesses in NO are expecting losses during the huricanne - what is the difference if the water takes the TV, or some guy on 5bucks an hour down at the local Walmart. selling that TV might feed his family for a month. the only people who come off worse are the insurance companies, for whom i have already expressed my lack of affection.

 

regarding the specific bit about hypothetically owning a store there; i would probably give away as much stuff as i could get away with claiming on the insurance. the system takes so much from the individual, its time that we got something back.

 

jonathan

 

Stealing is stealing. You see what these people are doing? They are stealing cars now. They are starting brawls, shooting guns, etc. They are stealing for personal gain, not to help their family. So now you are going to tell me that the LA Riots was ok because they were stealing stuff that could help their family?

 

People need to have some freakin honor and live with some dignity, not take advantage at someone elses expense. Hell, if the company says, "Ok, you can take our stuff" I'm all for it. But just taking it with no regard to anyone, taking electronics, cars, etc. thats just messed up.

 

Also illegal immigrants are a cause for unemployment. Legal people that live here lose their jobs because illegals come in, and take a 2 dollar an hour wage, therefore results in the firing of workers there because its cheap labor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also illegal immigrants are a cause for unemployment. Legal people that live here lose their jobs because illegals come in, and take a 2 dollar an hour wage, therefore results in the firing of workers there because its cheap labor.

 

i have to say that the above statement would be very typical of right wing racists over here. sad that you should say such a thing.

 

so do you not feel that the executives at the top of the pile might be partially responsible? they earn millions, and only dream of earning more. they take the cheap labour as it makes them more money.

 

now if there was equality for all, they would be paid something fairer, and there would be more money for everyone else. take an exec on $5million a year (i hear that that is a pretty average salary for such a position in the US). if he/she was paid $500k instead (already a very high wage) then he/she could employ 180 people on $25k a year. and maybe they could have a vacation and a health plan too. and then also any immigrants (who are just trying to make enough money to feed their faimly - who would begrudge them that) could work too. dont forget that the US is a country of immigrants - to me it seems unfair to let x number of people in, and then close the borders because you dont want any more. the US has the space to home many millions of immigrants but the problem is not the immigrants but the inequality and wastefulness of American culture. you have far more in common with the immigrant than the business exec - if you worked together you could fight the inequality.

 

jonathan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also illegal immigrants are a cause for unemployment. Legal people that live here lose their jobs because illegals come in, and take a 2 dollar an hour wage, therefore results in the firing of workers there because its cheap labor.

 

i have to say that the above statement would be very typical of right wing racists over here. sad that you should say such a thing.

 

so do you not feel that the executives at the top of the pile might be partially responsible? they earn millions, and only dream of earning more. they take the cheap labour as it makes them more money.

 

now if there was equality for all, they would be paid something fairer, and there would be more money for everyone else. take an exec on $5million a year (i hear that that is a pretty average salary for such a position in the US). if he/she was paid $500k instead (already a very high wage) then he/she could employ 180 people on $25k a year. and maybe they could have a vacation and a health plan too. and then also any immigrants (who are just trying to make enough money to feed their faimly - who would begrudge them that) could work too. dont forget that the US is a country of immigrants - to me it seems unfair to let x number of people in, and then close the borders because you dont want any more. the US has the space to home many millions of immigrants but the problem is not the immigrants but the inequality and wastefulness of American culture. you have far more in common with the immigrant than the business exec - if you worked together you could fight the inequality.

 

jonathan

 

Heck, my land was taken by the white man. I am not pro America, but only pro for what makes this place better than it already is. I am just stating what I believe is true, and I have heard of people working that lost jobs thanks to these illegals.

 

I have no problem with legal immigration, but this illegal stuff is making this place worse. Crime rates go up (good example is my area), more money to train kids (since these kids are bad at english, we can't focus on helping other kids), more money going to building schools yet not to teachers (oddly as it sounds, they can only build with the money), and they force others out of jobs. You want to blame execs (as I have seen from all of your posts) and it does make a lot of sense, I don't like corporations either. But we can't put all the blame on them, this is a two side effort deal.

 

First off illegals know it is illegal to come here, yet they do. This in and of itself jeopardizes many peoples jobs since the obvious thing is to make money, therefore getting cheaper labor. This is the blueprint on getting paid, cheap labor. Its highly impossible to get rich with paying a good wage, hence corporations make jobs outside of the US such as India for customer service.

 

Don't blame the corporation for the wage, this is how you make money. If you want to be "fair", then you aint gonna get that grandiose life that you want, a big house, a secure salary, etc. Not everyone is going to say "O, I will sacrifice 100k out of my income and live off of 40k, people want security in life as well as luxury.

 

Second, the illegals are not really considerate. Its a good example here where I live. The children are not disciplined (like I mentioned, not sure if this is a cultural thing but I actually had a discussion with my Mexican teacher about that) but over here, they just let their kids throw food around, curse, jump on tables, etc. Of course, theres the gangs with tagging, etc.

 

Don't get me wrong, I feel for immigrants that want to support their family, but the illegal way is just unfair. I have a friend that is an immigrant and he had to wait years before he could come. His family went first (since his siblings were younger) but he was left behind and had to wait. You see how unfair this is to people like him that do it the legal way? Plus, they have to pay a lot of money just to stay here and to take citizenship oaths.

 

Then people say, "These people across the border take jobs others don't want". While this may be true, it is because:

 

1. The illegals came over.

2. With illegals here, the company lowers its pay and fires the workers that worked there.

3. Illegals now run the joint and more come and come and do the same.

 

Like I said, this is a two side story, but if the illegals didn't come over in the first place and did it the legal way, this mess wouldn't have happened. Also how they "contribute" anything to society, such as no taxes, adding more people to the melting pot, etc. it just adds more wood to the fire.

 

Im not against immigration, but illegal immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is easy to take the moral high road and claim that looting is looting and it is just plain wrong. But when I look at the pictures from New Orleans, I don't see the face of greed, I see the face of desperation: 90°F, 80% humidity, no water, no food, no sewage disposal, no electricity. I see people who have watched their loved ones die while in their arms; people who have seen rescue vessels pass them by time and time again. Have you ever tried to help an injured dog? It cannot reason. It is in pain, and it doesn't trust you, and it growls and turns on you and tries to bite you. That is what we are seeing in New Orleans. People who have been pushed to the absolute limits of their ability to think and who are striking out where ever they can. Not everyone, of course, but certainly many. It is very grim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is easy to take the moral high road and claim that looting is looting and it is just plain wrong. But when I look at the pictures from New Orleans, I don't see the face of greed, I see the face of desperation: 90°F, 80% humidity, no water, no food, no sewage disposal, no electricity. I see people who have watched their loved ones die while in their arms; people who have seen rescue vessels pass them by time and time again. Have you ever tried to help an injured dog? It cannot reason. It is in pain, and it doesn't trust you, and it growls and turns on you and tries to bite you. That is what we are seeing in New Orleans. People who have been pushed to the absolute limits of their ability to think and who are striking out where ever they can. Not everyone, of course, but certainly many. It is very grim.

 

"It" cannot reason? The dog doesnt know your intentions and is scared. BTW, Im not going to refer to "It" anymore.

 

Anywho, from what I seen, is people with grins getting beer, stealing cars, getting into fights, shooting guns, and I'm taking the moral high road? Ok, so if theres a murderer killing people, I wont take the "moral high road" because that is just plain wrong.

 

People need to stop using scape goats, people cannot take responsibilty for themselves, therefore, they put it on something else.

 

Like I said, if they are taking it for medical reasons, I can understand it. But these beers, cars, and SHOES?!, that is bull.

 

 

EDIT: Just reread it and I didn't mean to sound like a smart alec, but I was just comparing the logic. No offense to your stance on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see pictures evey day of the death and destruction in New Orleans. But there are two pictures I would like to see:

 

The first, is the picture of George Bush, chest deep in water. The water is contaminated with raw sewage, petroleum products, heavy metals, industrial pollutants, and the decaying remains of animal and human bodies. He tugs on the arm of a bloated body lodged beween some debris and as the body floats toward him we see a bullet hole in its head. All the time Bush is patiently explaining why it is necessary to "stay the course" in Iraq. He is expaining why 40% of the Mississippi National Guard and 35% of the Louisiana National Guard are in Iraq, and why it is necessary to "take the war to the enemy" to save lives in America.

 

The other picture I would like to see is one of Kathleen Blanco (the governor of Louisiana) as she meets with Bush. All cameras are on her as she walks up to the president later this afternoon. Bush wears a sober expression and everyone is silent. She walks up to him, pauses a moment, then slaps him across the face and says, "Where the HELL have you been!" (I am cynical enough to think that the main reason it took Bush 48 hours to take any action, was because it wasn't until then that the extent of the damage to the oil and gas industry was known. Until then it was just a bunch of poor people who were dying..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense taken Koll!

 

I think people are mostly the same no matter what their ethnicity, nationality or culture. I don't think Iraqis are "animals" as Bush once said. I don't think that most of the looters in NO are greedy or evil (although there certainly are some people who fall into this category). So when I see looting and riots and attacks on rescue workers (which truly are reprehensible) I ask myself: "What wolud cause me to act this way. It is not an acceptable for me to answer, "I would never do this." I know from experience that I can be pushed to the edge. And I think that is what we are seeing: people who are not (for whatever reason) fully in charge of their mental faculties and their actions.

 

That doesn't mean we should back off and let them control the city. It doesn't mean we shoud find excuses. But it does mean that we shouldn't be surprised. Any emergency rescue plan that doesn't take into account civil unrest during a national disaster, is just plain inadequate. If I am sitting here, nice and dry, well fed and hydrated, finding fault with people I would start with George Bush not the people of New Orleans. In 2000, FEMA produced a report in which they outlined the three likeliest, most catastrophic disaster which our contry would face. The top three, in no particular order, were: An earthquake in San Francisco, a terrorist attack in New York City, and a hurricane in New Orleans.

 

http://www.swingstateproject.com/2005/08/katrina_proves.php

 

The Bush administrations responce was to cut funding. It has been known for many, many years that a major hurricane in New Orleans would be catastrophic. The levee walls were built to wishstand only a category 3 hurricane. The coastal wetlands are being washed away. The details that we see in New Orleans now, lost power, massive flooding, hospitals turning away sick and injured, people stranded and dying within sight of rescue workers, widescale civil unrest and looting, these were all predicted by FEMA. But without money, plans cannot be put into effect. Over the past 4 years, newspapers have repeatedly cited funding for the "war" in Iraq as the major reason that levee pojects have been put on hold.

 

So as a category 5 hurricane was barreling down on New Orleans, where was Bush? On a 5-week vacation. Where was Cheney? On vacation. Where was the National Guard? In Iraq. The lesson we should have learned from Iraq is that it is far, far harder to restore order than it is to maintain it in the first place, but the response from the federal government was 48 hours too late. (Bush did urge people too leave the area, that is true. But how do you do that when you are in a nursing home? Or a hospical? Or don't have a car? Or are living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford gas or a hotel? I know one person who stayed because when she evacuated for hurricane Dennis it cost her $1500 dollars. She couldn't afford to evacuate again.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have one friend, a woman, living in New Orleans. As she doesn't own a car, and lives alone, I wouldn't be surprised if she'd stayed. My best hope is that a boyfriend took her out of the area, but I think it's more likely that she either ended up in the Superdome, or stayed in her apartment. The latter possibility scares the shit out of me, with the current situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and me both, brother. This lady is, like, 105 pounds soaking wet, and couldn't defend herself from a 10 year old. Her apartment complex isn't, by far, in the roughest part in the city but it isn't the safest, either.

 

To compound matters, she doesn't own a cellphone and I don't know where she works anymore, so it's entirely possible that even when things start getting put back together there, I'll never know what happened to her.

 

Now that the Superdome evacuees are arriving here, I'm hoping that she was on one of the buses and she gets ahold of me soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense taken Koll!

 

I think people are mostly the same no matter what their ethnicity, nationality or culture. I don't think Iraqis are "animals" as Bush once said. I don't think that most of the looters in NO are greedy or evil (although there certainly are some people who fall into this category). So when I see looting and riots and attacks on rescue workers (which truly are reprehensible) I ask myself: "What would cause me to act this way. It is not an acceptable for me to answer, "I would never do this." I know from experience that I can be pushed to the edge. And I think that is what we are seeing: people who are not (for whatever reason) fully in charge of their mental faculties and their actions.

 

 

Very reasonable Sirdle. Yes, it would be absurd to deny that the some looters are out of their minds right now in desperation and grief. IF I was in their situation, in the heat and stench, walking through deep waters filled with crap, making my way through dead bodies of people and animals, I would go insane. I couldnt bare it. if my loved ones were in that situation, it would be a million times more unbearable for me. My heart is breaking for them, and I hadnt really appreciated the magnitude of the suffering and extent of devastation until I watched an in depth news coverage on it last night.

 

It is almost impossible not to be moved and deeply saddened by the images of suffering in New Orleans. But my sympathy and empathy extends not just to these desparate people looting to survive under unimaginable, nightmarish conditions, but also to those innocent people that are being endangered and hurt by their actions. And of course, for those (however few) looters that are simply motivated by greed and are taking advantage of a desparate situation, I have little if any sympathy for them.

 

I agree with almost everything you said about the Bush administration.

 

P.S. Animals are not "its" any more than you or I am. They are either "he's" or "she's". The "it" reference represents societal conditioning to that effect. This societel conditioning is so strong and deeply entrenched that even I inadvertently occasionally slip up and refer to animals as "its" even though I clearly dont believe they are.

 

P.P.S. Your words quoted above are indicative of a great capacity for EMPATHY (i.e. i am using that word to mean the ability to put yourself in the other's shoes and feel their pain). I encourage you to extend that same kind of empathy to the animals you (formerly?) ate or wore, and you will be more receptive to "ethical" veganism and might describe yourself as such sooner rather than later or never.

 

May all beings be free of suffering,

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan,

 

Have you gotten in touch with any mutual friends that might know what her situation is?

 

No, we were co-workers when I was still living there, and she left the company a couple of months ago. I understand that the company has temporarily relocated to Baton Rouge, but I seriously doubt anyone there would know her status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. Animals are not "its" any more than you or I am. They are either "he's" or "she's". The "it" reference represents societal conditioning to that effect. This societel conditioning is so strong and deeply entrenched that even I inadvertently occasionally slip up and refer to animals as "its" Shocked even though I clearly dont believe they are.

I meant no disrespect. You will notice that I also refered to a human as an "it." Our English language lacks the right words. If I say, "A person went to the store to have their bike repaired," there is not agreement between the subject (singular) and the predicate (plural). If I say, "his" bike, I am being sexist (if I am speaking generally, not about a specific person). If I say "its" bike, I am being insensitive I meant no disrespect.

 

On a more positive note: I heard a report of a rescue worker pulling up to a house in "his" boat. A man in the window asked him if they could bring their pets. The worker said, "No, we don't have room." The reporter, at a slightly different angle and closer to the window, saw a woman near the bed saying, "Get your little whiskers in there," as she put her cats into a duffle bag. Then she came to the window, smiled at the rescuer and gently handed her bag to her husband. The reporter said nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sirdle - i agree entirely with everything you said. good to see eye to eye.

 

kollision - i dont agree with anything you said, you have entirely the wrong end of the stick, and your view is very in keeping with that of populist media. i am sorry if this offends, but i find it disapointing. you make far too many generalisations and you are excusing exploitative capitalism. im sorry but to me that is wrong.

 

jonathan

 

(ps - wont be able to post quite as much now as ive got a job )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...