.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Yoga Korunta

Life & Politics

Location: United States

One learns, as nothing endures but change.

22 September 2005

Hurricane Rita Evacuees

Thousands of residents of Galveston, Houston, and Dallas are fleeing hurricane Rita. Someone with wealth and power should step forward and offer shelter to these unfortunate victims of natural disaster. Someone with a ranch in Crawford, for example. What would the Boy President say to being asked to share his great wealth and spacious home? Try change: set a good example by extending the offer to the New Orleans evacuees, also.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was hoping for a little bit more intellectual stimulation from your BLOG. It seems to be a political diatribe. I believe most people of average or above average intelligence would not expect the President to open his ranch – it is not practical suggestion. I also believe when people play so blatantly to one side or the other, any information that had any real value is disregarded. Take note of our soon to be confirmed Chief Justice. You can bet that he is very conservative but as he spoke and presented himself to the American public he made himself not look like a conservative ideologue.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about this for a topic:

Should the American public have to pay for property damage, loss of livelihood, rescue operations, relieve aid and loss of life when people build and live in areas such a Galveston and Huston (17 ft undersea level and 4 ft respectively)? In the market people who take higher risks receive bigger rewards or bigger losses than a person who puts his money in a safer area or in a saving account It is not that I don’t grief for people, it just that why should the American people have to pay for somebody else’s risk. Let us look at it in a different way. Why should we give any money to people who want to rebuild in the same place such as New Orleans. If it is our policy to help people after a natural disaster – let them start over again in a safer place.

Blogger Yoga Korunta said...

Yes, John Roberts did quite well while being questioned. I did not comment on him as there is little political controversy, ie, no firm stance on abortion. Since he is replacing Rehnquist the conservative vote stays even. There are no personal feelings other than the general concern that a few religious people seem too powerful.

I was not aware of the Texan cities' vulnerability. I agree; the relatively greater risk should be considered when distributing rebuilding funds.

Blogger a rose is a rose said...

as american citizens we are responsible for one another. earthquakes can happen anywhere, even here in connecticut. where would we all move? the californians to ok or ks. whoops, there are twisters there. let's pack them all up and move to north dakota............whoops it gets to be MINUS 60 in the winter.......let's pack everyone up and move to.........

c'mon, take your skirt off anonymous

Blogger Yoga Korunta said...

How many insurance companies will play country music and whine, "Poor, poor, pitiful us. We never imagined paying claims!"

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear a rose is rose is a rose,

We as American citizens are responsible for other American citizens. You are making a very simplistic argument. “the californians to ok or ks. whoops, there are twisters there. let's pack them all up and move to north Dakota. I know this type of argument is typical of our time but it is truly lacking to be included in any true public policy debate. I’m talking about evaluation of risk when taxpayers’ money is involved in rebuilding. I never said we wouldn’t help them rebuild but the question is should be allowed to rebuild in the same place. How about the wealthy homes in places like the Outerbanks, where building should have never been built? In places in California where homes should have never been built in the first place like on the side of hills and in valleys. Why should we help rebuild in the first place! Second if it is decided that since we are American citizens and we need to help other American citizens why shou8ld they be allowed to rebuild in the same place if it is deemed unsafe for man made structures? I’m tired of the 30 second sound bite that the American public finds so fulfilling. Or the sitcom answers that seem to be the answers fore everything “smart and wise guy remark”. Lets get down to true public policy debates that may take time and effort to solve a problem.- some answers are not found in a ½ hour meeting.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't want to insult anybody's intellegence but I have copied from an article I was reading today several points about the above topic. It is my hope that you can read several lines that are copied below and comprehend them.

The National Flood Insurance Program provided incentives to build homes and businesses in flood-prone areas, Watkins says.

By living so close to the coasts, we have hampered nature," says climate scientist Brenda Ekwurzel of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group. Uninhabited barrier islands that once shielded coastal towns are now dotted with homes and communities, she says. In and around New Orleans, development destroyed marshes that absorbed some of each storm's punch in earlier years.
The challenge is to continue paying attention to how we live and work along the nation's coasts, even after the storms are gone, Watkins says. "We can't let crisis drive us instead of leadership."
The solution? Government and citizens must manage coastal regions in an integrated fashion instead of lumping development and storm responses into separate categories, Watkins says. Otherwise, history will repeat itself.
In fact, a ubiquitous technology facilitated this migration. During the last peak period of hurricane activity in the 1940s and 1950s, there simply weren't that many people living in Florida and along the Gulf Coast. It was too hot and humid

Blogger theresa said...

I think it's a great idea. What we need are more people thinking creatively instead of greedily. My house members considered not paying our utility bill so we could send more money to Hurricane victims. Maybe that seems stupid, but for my way of thinking, I still have all my loved ones, a job, a home and all my stuff. A little inconvenience like no electricity for a while seems small in comparison. I lost that argument, of course, but we still discussed it and found more money to send.

Blogger Yoga Korunta said...

Theresa makes a good point. From another perspective, how many of us are sanguine during power loss? Anyone we know stand before a refrigerator, hold the door open to exclaim, "The food will spoil!"

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yoga makes a point but give this a thought. Do people realize that there are pockets of the 3rd world or being more politically correct developing world conditions in the good old USA. I saw a program last year on a community in the south that had no running water (plumbing) nor electricity. I believe the area was being rebuild under a governmetn development grant. People seem to forgot the poverty that exist without a hurricane or natural disaster. Why do we as American citizens accept that these conditions exist in a country such as USA? Do we blame these people for being poor? It is their fault, they are lazy, they don't want to work and so on & so on. Why can we only open our pocketbooks for a natural disaster but be so non-caring for people less fortunate than the general population!

Blogger Caryn said...

I think it's a good idea. Somewhere along the line of those who are voting for the war sending their own kids. You know, like certain twin college girls?

Blogger Yoga Korunta said...

I suspect Bush was financed by the GOP powers with the idea that a war President with daughters wouldn't be asked to send his own.

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Be prepared for the next center huricaine national or find another one that's similar. As the Boy Scouts say: "Be Prepared"!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

View My Stats