Moving out

[pecunium]

Maia and I are going on a Charity Ride in the hills above Berkeley. So I'll be, semi-blissfully, out of the loop until Monday.

Her mother's cell has roaming, and I am giving that number to the NCO who would be co-ordinating aid to Kartrina victims (which is, sadly, more than just those folks in New Orleans. The whole Gulf Coast took a beating), so there is the possibility I won't be around for a good long while.

If I get the call, and I get the time, I'll let people know I'm on my way. if you don't hear from me soon, well you know where I am.

In the meanwhile, though I know you've heard it elsewhere, if you've got money to spare, send some to a relief agency. The Red Cross (try a local office, New York is also a good one) Noah's Wish (pets need help too) or whatever charity you favor.

The entire city is evacuated. It will be weeks, if not months, before they can go back.

The City of New Orleans had a population of 485,000 people. They have no jobs, no homes, no way to support themselves. Those who are in hotels right now, won't be able to stay in them. They are going to need help, and not just for the week, but probably for months.

Sports stadiums are not going to be enough.

Winter is coming.

Comments

I'm not meaning to stir here just actually curious..

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

A lot of people in the UK are writing about NO on blogs. We, brought up in a semi socialist welfare-state-ish country, find it difficult to understand what the situation is with large numbers of people rendered homeless or destitute by natural disaster of this kind. Is this truely simply a case for charity and churches, or will the state (Govt - I don't mean just Louisiana) help out at all? Do people on the whole think this is an ok state of affairs? Is there any case internally for money being diverted from other govt budgets to disaster relief? One UK bloggger, eg, has suggested that as the US is a rich country not a 3rd world country, we should not be donating to US via Red Cross etc but reserving that aid for countries like Iraq etc on basis US can then choose to divert resources it does have (or I suppose, tax more.) Does the army have a role to play in putting the city back together or will that all be on private insurance such as it is?

Essentially what this situation is doing over here, grisly though it is, is giving us a kind of case study in how "pure" capitalism works as opposed to how our wishy washy semi Blairite version would, and we';re not dealing well with it ...

And one thing I've been wondering -- I can just about imagine, having spent a fair bit of time in the US (including NO, once - sigh) that there would be no evacuation plan of any much sort. Everyone in the US after all can afford a car (irony.)

But would it be as left to people to fend individually if this had been the reult of a terrorist attack? Surely post 9/11, every city has a terrorist city survival strategy just as London had in July?

Re: I'm not meaning to stir here just actually curious..

[ad-kay.livejournal.com]

You pose some very good questions. The Gulf Coast will be declared disaster areas and be given Federal aid, but that doesn't help right now, does it? Part of the problem is that funds for FEMA, (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) was gutted partially due to being subsumed under Homeland Security.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/29/AR2005082901445.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

And:

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/002331.html

FEMA was also affected by W's appointing inexperienced political cronies instead of experienced disaster management professionals, thereby undoing the good reform work Clinton did.

And Federal spending for the Army Corps of Engineer flood control programs got chopped. Much of the funds that should have gone to New Orleans went (wait for it...) to Iraq.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

And thousands of National Guardspeople are in Iraq instead of being able to help out at home.

Wikipedia has a great entry on Katrina in general:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina

Re: I'm not meaning to stir here just actually curious..

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

First, the scale is huge.

Second, the federal nature of the system means states have to pick up a lot of the slack; some states are poorer than others.

Third, because of so many things (a lot hearkening back to the puritans ethics) most such support (after the immediate aid) is fobbed off onto private groups.

One's house may get paid for, but if one was renting, sorry old bean, rough going, but you'll get by.

Given the massive blow to the economy (and the, as yet, undetermined collateral damage to the rest of the country) it's going to be a long time until it all stabilises again.

In re the evacuation plan... Ha! The myth of individualism, and suchlike make it difficult for most people (oddly enough) to fend for themselves, and makes it hard to get them to accept the costs of having a plan for all.

If/when L.A. gets the really big earthquake we all pretend we expect, it will be horrid. The water lines will break, and there will be riots, and killings, and hundreds of thousands dead.

Because there isn't any way to move 14 millions of people.

TK

Re: I'm not meaning to stir here just actually curious..

[royeh.livejournal.com]

This could be good practice for the coming Bush depression,
when many more of us are likely to be out of work, home, food,...

all over the country. & the world, for that matter.