9/2     So everyone is complaining that the Federal response to
        this Katrina business is too slow.
        1. Why should there be a federal response at all?
        2. Shouldn't it be the responsiblity of the state to deal
           with this sort of thing?
        3. Why blame the feds for acting slowly when the states
           didn't ask for help for ~ 2 days? [ I could be wrong
           on the timeframe here ]
        \_ 33% Federal income tax, that's fucking why.  Screw all the "the
           gub'mint should this, and the Feds should that", here's a service
           that people paid for and they ain't getting it.  Someone should
           call the BBB.  -John
        2. Shouldn't it be the responsiblity of the state to deal
           with this sort of thing?
        3. Why blame the feds for acting slowly when the states
           didn't ask for help for ~ 2 days? [ I could be wrong
           on the timeframe here
        \_ Hurray for narrow ideologies that oversimplify issues.  I think
           the problem with the federal response is that this catastrophe
           was predicted up to four years ago, yet the budget for building
           precautions to avert it has been consistently cut by this
           administration.  Then it's taken this long to bring to bear the
           official federal disaster relief agency, which should nominally
           be in charge since its supposed replacement has not yet been put
           in place.  If this is the response time for a predicted disaster
           with that many people who did not or could not evacuate, what's
           going to happen the next time an unpredicted disaster strikes?
        \_ So, you don't think FDR should of step in to revive the economy
           back in the 1930's, right?  Should we abolished EPA and SEC?
           \_ I think FDR over stepped the bounds of his authority
              in many cases (the USSC thought so as well). I'm not
              100% convinced that the EPA falls w/in the commerce
              pwr of Art 1 Sec 8, but its probably close. The SEC
              clearly falls under the commerce pwr, so congress
              has ever right to establish it.
              has every right to establish it.
              My argument is about separation of pwrs, the nature
              of our gov is that the states are independent from
              the fed gov and are responsible for administration
              of internal affiars. This is an internal affair,
              let the state deal w/ it UNLESS they ask for help
              from the feds. IF they ask for help from the feds
              and the feds mess it up, then its probably okay to
              evaluate the federal response. But evaluating the
              federal response prior to any state request is not
              valid. [ If I got the timeframe wrong, sorry to be
              a bother ]
              \_ hmm... state right again.  I thought those who
                 advocate "seperate but equal" use "state right" as
                 main arguement.  *FURTHER*  How about the Flood of
                 Mississippi in 1927, when bankers in New Orleans
                 decided to break the leeves to save New Orleans.
                 But the result was complete devistation to the country
                 side... State Supreme Court was completely aligned
                 with those white plantation owners / bankers, all
                 law suit was ruled in favor of those who were white.
                 You *PREFER* that kind of state right?  --non white
                 \_ The states are subordinate to the constitution
                    and separate but equal is incompatible w/ the
                    the 14th amd.
                    If the local gov/populace undertakes a measures
                    that is not in the best interest of the local
                    populace, the sol'n isn't to call in the feds.
                    The sol'n is to deal w/ it local. Or move.
                    Personally, I don't trust any gov. - local or
                    fed - to act in the best interests of the ppl.
                    But I think that the feds have even less interest
                    in acting responsibly than the locals, therefore
                    I am opposed to widespread fed intervention.
                    -also non-white
        \_ You _are_ wrong on the timeframe.  Blanco asked for financial
           assistance for facilitating evacuations on the 26th, when it
           became apparent that the storm (then a Cat IV, soon to be Cat V)
           was heading their way.  Why is a federal response needed?  Because
           preventing a meltdown of an entire region of our country is an
           integral part of protecting your precious markets.  This is a
           social, economic, and humanitarian crisis on our sovreign territory.
           \_ As I understand it, assistance for evacuation for the
              entire region was given by the fed gov (note more than
              just NO was affected). The problem w/ NO is that the
              local resources were not mobilized b/c of local gov
              inaction and local resident refusal. The fed gov
              should not be blamed for the actions of the local
              populace.
              My questions have nothing to do w/ mkts, &c. They
              are about separation of pwrs.  Shouldn't the states
              be responsible for themselves to a certain extent?
              Why should the fed gov be involved in everything
              immediately?
              Is it always true that a federal response will be
              superior to a local response (cf '89 quake)?
              [ Perhaps my views re this event are colored b/c I
                come from a part of the world where thousands
                of ppl die in floods every year and no one ever
                notices ]
              \_ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050903/ap_on_re_us/katrina_national_guard
              \_ http://tinyurl.com/deota (news.yahoo.com)
                 This was a failure of planning.  It's STILL failing.  There
                 are people waiting and wanting to help.  There is a breakdown
                 here that is resulting in people dying of dehydration and
                 illness on the streets of american cities.  When the federal
                 government has depleted the available national guard for the
                 states involved, it is THEIR responsibility to fill the gaps.
                 \_ A few questions:
                    1. Is the argument: the feds sent the NG from LA to
                       Iraq so that's why they weren't in NO to help w/
                       this mess?
                    \_ This is one portion of the argument that puts the onus
                       of insufficient resources for the state on the feds.
                    2. If this is the argument, is the assertion also
                       that so many NG are in Iraq that all of the NG
                       offered by the other states wouldn't have been
                       enough to deal w/ the situtaion?
                    \_ I don't know, and can't speak to it.  but you apparently
                       didn't read the article.  the request _was_ made for
                       more NG support and it languished in Washington (who
                       would, I suppose, have to approve any interstate troop
                       transfers).
                       \_ I got the impression that the delay was b/c LA
                          wanted to use the NG troops for police purposes
                          and hadn't put into place provisions for such
                          use in their agreements. I saw the delay as
                          shortsightedness on LA's part not as a failing
                          of the feds. [ I could be wrong ]
                    3. Assuming that the feds hadn't deployed the NG
                       to Iraq, is the assertion that there were enough
                       NG in NO to deal with the situtation in a better
                       manner?
                    4. If so, where is the proof that the NG in NO wouldn't
                       have been overwhelmed just like the NO cops were?
                       The whole city was flooded and most of the roads
                       were out. Unless you are claiming that the NG in NO
                       had a huge fleet of choppers and hovercraft, what
                       difference could it possibly have made - many of
                       the LA NG probably would have ended up dead as well.
                    \_ Wow.  Logical leap.  I don't know what their plan would
                       be but I would assume it would not include congregating
                       their forces in the center of Katrina's path and letting
                       it wipe them off the map.  Are you claiming that the LA
                       NG is a backwoods militia with a couple jeeps and some
                       armored bicycles?  I would think they would have large
                       vehicles and cargo movers that could be used as personnel
                       transports to help facillitate evacuations and high-water
                       vehicles, helicopters and boats to help in search and
                       rescue, and portable generators to keep hospitals
                       working.  Since these things didn't show up, I would
                       assume that they didn't have enough people and equipment
                       here.
                       \_ NO was prepared for a cat 3 or so hurricane, not
                          one this big. It was known that the best way to
                          survive was to evacuate, but the local gov didn't
                          handle that properly. If the NG had been in NO,
                          where is the proof that they could have handled
                          the situation better than the cops if the whole
                          place knew they couldn't have handled a situation
                          like this?
                    5. Assume that the NG hadn't been deployed to Iraq,
                       some (perhaps many) of the NG in LA would have
                       been outside of NO. What is the basis for a claim
                       that they could have rendered assistance to NO
                       in a better manner than external NG troops?
                    \_ How big do you think LA is?  The roads have been
                       passable enough for busses leaving.  I'm sure they could
                       get their armored bicycles through in less than 5 FUCKING
                       DAYS.
                       \_ This makes no difference. If the external
                          troops could have deployed as quickly as
                          the LA troops, then the fact that the LA
                          troops were not present does not change
                          anything.
                    While there may have been a failure of planning,
                    to me it seems to be a failure at a state level
                    not at a fed level. The fed response seems to be
                    sufficient.
                    \_ The president doesn't agree with you
                       \_ So what? I don't agree w/ the pres on many
                          things.
        \_ Hello jblack! Haven't seen you for a while. I miss you too.
           Did you have a blast at the golf course? Did you break 80?
        \_ Is this the same idiot who said he wouldn't donate money
           to natural disaster relief funds because we should
           instead be donating money to the "root of the problem"?
           \_ No. I donated money to this (and many other) relief
              efforts. I'm just not clear on why this is/should be
              a federal problem instead of a state problem (the
              states are free to ask for federal help, but until
              they do can/why should the feds get involved?)
        \_ Thank you for speaking out. Like you I'm a minority and I'm
           fed up with you socialists. I'm a believer in family
           values, moral values, free markets, small government, self-
           reliance, and fiscal rectitude. The New Orleans are like the
           grasshoppers who squander food and party everyday until
           winter comes. It's just a matter of time before they start
           begging for food. There's a saying that God helps those who
           help themselves. I'm sick and tired of having to pay
           for illegal immigrants and lazy people so that they can get
           a free education and free lunch. If the Orleans had any family
           values or work ethics they would work hard and support
           themselves.  Instead they leech off from hard honest working
           people. The fact that they loot and rape tells you the kind
           of people they are. They're worse than the grasshoppers and
           they have no sympathy from me.
           \_ This just has to be a troll.
              \- i'm sure this is a troll but to find a point in it
                 all ... i think there are tiers of govt involvement
                 there are tiers of government. it's quite under-
                 stanable the federal govt be the "backup" when the
                 state/local govt collapses. it's not like states should
                 only rely on "private point to point agreements"
                 with other public or private units ... again, analogosly
                 when orange county collapsed, the CA state steped in
                 and this is case the "buck" reasonably stopped with
                 the state. moving on from "tier of govt" to "tiers
                 of involvement/effort", i think even many non-fruitcake
                 libertarian and small-govt people would think it is
                 consistent with the mission of a "minimal state"
                 to provide order. moving on from there to the
                 provision of emergency clean water, doesnt seem
                 crazy talk. there is a decent prima facie economic
                 case to think the govt should be responsible for
                 public goods like levy's ... surely even more so
                 public goods like levees ... surely even more so
                 than the classic case of lighthouses, which are a
                 sop to the shipping industry by and large [yes, i
                 am aware of some cliams of the possibility of private
                 lighthouses]. this level of involvement, does not
                 seem at odds with federal involvement in the new
                 bay bridge, or ANWAR, or Bob's Expensive Alaskan
                 Bridge or the Army Corps of Engineers dredging
                 channels for oil tankers or the Fed govt researching
                 AIDS or cancer. but finally, if we are talking should the
                 govt be involved in "making people whole", i do agree
                 this seems problematic. i personally have not heard a
                 good rational [as opposed to political or senitmental]
                 case for why there should have been a special compensation
                 fund for 9/11 victims. i think vastly increasing the
                 death benefits for military KIA or firefighters and such
                 KIA at home should be given relatively more. --psb
                 \_ Orange County is paying the bonds off with their
                    own money. The State didn't bail them out.
                    \- the state did step in in the short term.
                       if you want to send LA a bill for the
                       water delivered later, i guess you can do
                       so. should the state send a bill to people
                       for firefighting services? or just get out
                         \_ they do.  it's called "taxes".
                       of the firefighting business? i think there
                       is a difference between firefighting and
                       rescuing people from mt mckinley. and
                       remember at least some of the hypociritical
                       conservatives [not the libertarians in this
                       case] wnat the FED GOVT to be involved in
                       protecting "traditional marriages" from
                       assmaster and deviant marriages. maybe
                       scalia will claim the state will make it
                       iillegal for people to build PRIVATE LEVEES
                       or drink non-govt suppplied water ... oh wait
                       in some countries where water provision has been
                       made private they *have* passed laws making it
                       illegal to collect your own water.
                       (BTW, I am not familiar with the details of
                       how the orange county matter was settled
                       but i do believe there was some assistance
                       in buying htem time to restructure [that's
                       part of the point of bankrupty gradations]
                       and there may have been some "repuational
                       assistance" to help them lower their
                       interest rates when they went back into
                       the borrowing pool).
                       \_ Hey Partha, I think you should work on making your
                          writing look a little less like verbal vomit.
                            -- ilyas (friendly neighborhood total dumbass)
                               \- verbal vomit >> mental vomit
                                  i think a point of intersection of
                                  my moral and your political philosophy
                                  is the state should not compel you to
                                  vomit or read. however you may wish to
                                  read Rochin v. California and vomit.
                                  http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/333
                                  --psb
                                  \_ I think the state should make an exception
                                     in your case, since you are a pol pot
                                     in training.  You know, the counterfactual
                                     golden rule -- do onto others as they
                                     would have done onto you if they only
                                     could.  -- ilyas
                                     \- well i think i'd do a lot of good
                                        early in my tenure as pol pot ...
                                        i acknowledge things might get
                                        carried away after a while. i mean
                                        we can all agree on tunring the
                                        out of hand after a while. i mean
                                        we can all agree on tunring The
                                        Donald into Trump Carpaccio, right?
                                        \_ You give yourself too much credit.
                                             -- psb for fertilizer 2008
                        \_ We used to have private fire companies whose
                           services were paid for by the insurance companies.
                           I think all fire fighting is public in the US now.
                           I wonder if it's now illegal to operate a private
                           fire company or merely just uneconomical.
                           \_ I know someone who works for one, but he only
                              does forest fires, and he said his unit is the
                              only one he knows of that's private.  He likes it.
                           \- well there were medival "law merchants" too.
                              doesnt mean today the govt should get out of
                              the business of business law. i supposed
                              gated communities can choose to have their
                              own fire fighters and that may get into
                              messy situations like private firefighting
                              companies "poaching" FFs trained on the public
                              dime. with an "arragement" like that it may
                              be "economical" ... OWNERSHIP SOCIETY.
                              i shall now watch CHEF DU FER instead of the motd.
                              \_ Chef du fer?  I'll be playing chemin de fer
                                 tomorrow.  BTW, much of the business of the
                                 legal system is now handled by private
                                 arbitrators.
                                 \- yes and lots of people put out their own
                                    kitchen fires. that's why i wrote
                                    "get out of business law" not 'have a
                                    monopoly on dispute resolution".
                                    they do have a monopoly on criminal
                                    prosecution.