How would we deal with Disaster ?

[silverback]

So are you blaming G. Bush again for this disaster f-s? Why not Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford, or Nixon?

I am trying to think what the people in New Orleans would have said if you would have told them " We need to spend several billion dollars on adding 15 feet to the top of this levee. We could build you a few schools with this money, or even some new county hospitals to cover your medicare, but someday this city might get hit (even though it never has been) with a category 5 hurricane. This is what this money should be spent on and that is that". I am guessing they would have said screw it, this city won't get hit with a 5.

[farmers_son]

The article I pasted said the problems with levees went back to Clinton.

I am not blaming anyone. It is the United States problem and they will assign blame when the time comes. Right now the priority should continue to be to save lives as it seems to be the case. I did say that I believe if there was a similar situation in Canada that the resources to prevent the problem would have been made available.

There is a difference in the way government operates in Canada and the United States. You might be interested in this site comparing state taxes:

http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/04staxrank.html

In Lousiana most of the state tax revenue is sales taxes. Personal and corporate income taxes are collected, corporate taxes are almost nothing. You can check out other states tax structure at:

http://www.census.gov/govs/www/statetax04.html

We in Canada sometimes enviously look to the Americans who do enjoy a lower level of taxation than we do which is maybe good for their economy but the downside could be money may not available for public safety and capital improvements such as levee improvements. In the case of New Orleans, with the benefit of hindsight, it was penny wise and pound foolish. Forgetting the personal tragedy and loss of life, one billion dollars is being spent every day on the recovery effort. Federal government money seems to be available for high profile disaster relief when obviously prevention was not a priority.

There are those in Canada who want everything to be like it is in the United States but I am saying our Canadian system offers advantages.

[farmers_son]

And on the topic of how would Canada deal with disaster I found this news item. I say well done!

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/09/08/louisiana_canada_thanks_20050909.html

A Louisiana state senator has praised a Canadian search and rescue team. Senator Walter Boasso said a Vancouver-based team reached St. Bernard parish five days before the U.S. army got there.

"Fabulous, fabulous guys," Boasso said. "They started rolling with us and got in boats to save people ... We've got Canadian flags flying everywhere."

The suburb of 68,000 people was initially ignored by U.S. authorities who were scrambling to get aid to New Orleans. Boasso said floodwater in his parish is still 2.4 metres deep in some places.

He said residents of the outlying parishes had to mount their own rescue and relief efforts when Hurricane Katrina struck last week.

The U.S. government response to the disaster has been widely criticized. Some politicians and editorial writers have called for the resignation of top Bush administration officials.

Boasso saved his praise for the Canadians and their quick work. "They were so glad to be here," he said. "They're still here. They are actually going door-to-door looking in the attics" for people to rescue.

[cowman]

I don't think our federal government is so great at building much of anything. They certainly don't spend as much on infrastructure as they take in...at least not out here! Sure never saw them step in and do anything with the Pine Lake tornado? Mostly fell to the municipality and some to the province.
But of course we do have those good safeguards that protect us from disasters like gun control, bilingualism, adscam, the human resources scandal etc. etc.!
The fact is the people were warned to get out and they didn't? If they chose to stay who is at fault? If you live in a dangerous area then whose fault is it? Is it really the government?
Bush has acknowledged there was a problem and has taken the steps that can relieve the problem...in Canada they would probably have to have a few weeks of committee meetings to see if anything needed to be done!

[FarmRanger]

Fortunately for the Americans are their corporate taxes low. Something the left has never understood is that corporations are not some fat guy sitting around smoking cigars and drinking sherry. Corporations are pieces of paper. They are run by people who pay taxes on anything they receive from the corporation.
Taxing corporations results in those same people never receiving the money that they collectively earned by either investing in, or for working as an employee. It also results in weakening the competitiveness of the company in a ever increasingly competitive world. Increasing corporate taxes takes money away from where corporate employees and shareholder would spend it (after being taxed at the higher marginal tax rate of the individual involved).
The United States wouldn’t have more tax money available if it raised corporate taxes, it would have less. For all the faults the American government has, not understanding this principle is not one of them. It always amazes me how the left either refuses to acknowledge this, or likes having the corporate bogey man to blame all the world’s ills on.

[farmers_son]

Whether the U.S. taxes its corporations or its citizens there is still the question of where the money is spent.

The United States spends 3-4% of its GDP on military spending as compared to Canada at 1%. The United States spends more on the military than the next ten largest defense spending countries combined. In fact in 2002 the U.S. spent almost as much on “defense” spending as the worlds 25 next largest military defense spending countries combined. Canada is included in this group. Since then the U.S. has started the war in Iraq; one would expect "defense" spending has increased even more. If people wonder where the money went that could have been spent on upgrading the levees you do not have to look any farther than the military.

Please see: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL32209.pdf

I am sure many are asking if New Orleans had a larger white population if upgrading the levees would be a higher priority. New Orleans is 67% black, only 28% white. Median income for a household is $27,000. 24% of the population live below the poverty line. Poor and black.

[farmers_son]

My understanding is the local government plays a large role in allocating priorities for infrastructure spending. If the demands were for schools, roadways, parks etc. and enforcing the levee, one would wonder how much pressure would come from the citizens for the 'soft' services vs infrastructure. I only have to look to our local urban centre where new parks and recreation facilities are built on an annual basis but for years the sewer lines weren't checked with cameras due to cost. The public demanded recreational facilities and there was only so much money to spend. I am willing to bet that there were choices made in New Orleans based on demands from the population. It appears that the majority of the decision makers in local government are black so I would doubt that they would be biased regarding how the money was spent vs how it would have been spent had the majority of the population been white.

Black vs white isn't even an issue as far as I can see, the main thing is that there are people that need help. Blame will be placed somewhere for the levee and lack of emergency response from the federal government in a timely manner but blame is not going to bring back those who werwe lost nor is it going to rebuild peoples lives. It will be a case of every able bodied citizen pitching in and forgetting color or blame if the gulf communities are ever going to rebuild.

[cowman]

Apparently New Orleans was sort of a "welfare row" where politicians encouraged the poor to live! A good solid voting block for the corrupt Democratic politicians that run Louisianna? Probably would make more sense to bulldoze a lot of it and forget about rebuilding.
Farm Ranger: I agree totally with you about the corporation thing! You should be careful what you say or you might be branded a corporation bootlicker or a packer lover! Whenever I say a corporation is just taking care of business by operating within the law, I usually get blasted! And if I further state the shareholders should expect the corporation to make as much money as possible and turn a profit, I am labelled a right wing Nazi or something!
I find it totally strange that people think a corporation is evil, because they operate within the law? If the law is basically flawed then it is the government to blame for not amending the law...not the corporation?
There are a few on here who have a decided left wing bent, which is okay I guess...but I find it strange that they tend to always blame big business(and the USA) for all the worlds woes? The fact is the likes of Cargill and Tyson and Walmart got where they are because they are more efficient and better businessmen than their competitors?

[farmers_son]

In the United States, the US corps of army engineers, is responsible for maintaining flood defences. The corps has long wanted to strengthen some of the levees which have been sinking. But according to local media, it was last year refused extra funding by the White House which wanted to save money to pay for homeland security against terrorism. "In its budget, the Bush administration proposed a significant reduction in funding for south-east Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project.

In June 2004, the corps' project manager, Al Naomi, went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and requested $2m for "urgent work" that Washington was now unable to pay for. "The levees are sinking," he said. "Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement."
Last year Walter Maestri, emergency chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, one of the worst affected areas, reportedly told the Times-Picayune newspaper: "It appears that the money [for strengthening levees against hurricanes] has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

Professor Dumas added that not enough provision seemed to have been made for poor people. "There doesn't seem to have been much attention paid to people who didn't have private automobiles," he said. "I didn't hear anything about school buses or city buses being used to aim people out of town." He said that there appeared to be little forward planning to cater to those on low incomes who would be unable to return to their homes for up to two months but who would not have the money to pay for that time in a hotel. "The Department of Homeland Security says on its website that it deals with natural disasters," he said. "They don't seem to have done a very good job. There doesn't seem to have been any long-term planning."

The war in Iraq was also being seen as playing a part in the federal response to the crisis. Many members of the National Guard who would normally have been swiftly mobilised to help in evacuation are on duty in Iraq. Although US air force, navy and army units were deployed to assist, the locally-based National Guard is depleted by the demands of the war.

Please see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1560351,00.html#article_continue

[farmers_son]

Cowman: When you say there are a few on here who have a left wing bent, do you include me? You would be very wrong. I am probably the most right wing person here and have a decidedly business oriented background. I do not think a corporation is evil because it operates within the law. However I am not so naïve to think that sometimes corporations operate outside of the law and some corporations operate outside of the law all the time. Would you say Enron and Worldcom were law-abiding? Corporations need to respect the law too.

“The fact is the likes of Cargill and Tyson and Walmart got where they are because they are more efficient and better businessmen than their competitors?” That could be true, but in Canada right now it could also be true these businesses are acting as monopolies. And if you appreciate the free market system you would know that monopolies cannot be allowed to exist in a free market or the market will fail. The Americans appreciate that better than we Canadians.

I have never branded you or anyone else a packer lover, a corporation boot licker or Nazi. Please do not brand me left wing.