The seer speaketh

[peterbirks]

George W Bush on ABC last night.

"I don't think anyone anticipated a breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm, but those levees got breached".

Birks blog on Sunday, 18 hours before Katrina hit New Orleans.

[New Orleans is] seriously in danger of a kind of flooded and destroyed fucked that we haven't seen in a major US city since San Francisco in 1906. Most of this will be because of flooding (the famous Katrina Waves....) that, if the levees break, will move through a city that for various reasons was built mainly below sea level.

Clearly he has the wrong advisers....

++++

Although George W doesn't read this blog (but should), it appears sometimes that the rest of the world does. No sooner do I say that I might just spend the month bonus hunting, when Party offers me 30% bonus up to $200, possibly in addition to the regular monthly reload bonus. Bastards.

And then, just when I admit that I am a horrible risk-averse coward when it comes to potentially life-changing decisions, my ex-boss telephones me, tells me that he is going back into business (he sold up his old business to the company for whom I currently work nearly five years ago), and asks me to join him in his "new venture". And I start worrying about reward-to-risk ratios, etc etc. We're having lunch next week, so I'll see what he wants to offer and what he has in mind. But, stick-in-the mud that I am, I can see myself staying here.

Comments

[geoffchall.livejournal.com]

Presumably your ex-boss signed some form of deal with the people who bought the company with a 5-year clause in it.

I know you're risk-averse but I would have thought you'd be keener to be in there haggling for an equity share in the new business. After all if your ex-boss has sold out once he's a lot more likely to do the same in another few years time. That very fact might be a good bargaining card. In some ways I would have thought that this is the kind of therapy you probably need. Some kind of challenge like that is more 'fun' than what you do right now surely.

But you've got the knowledge to weigh up whether this is a 55/45 bet. Just make the evaluation and size up the odds.

Another Bush gaffe

[(Anonymous)]

The news I read before Katrina (BBC, mostly) was anticipating worse damage to New Orleans than actually happened -- probably because Katrina dropped down from a level 5 hurricane to a level 4 or 3 as soon as it reached land.

I don't think Bush could have been watching the news at all, or maybe he just chose to forget.

The human problems in New Orleans now are partly because of the idiots who chose to remain when they should have got out, and partly because no level of government seems to have been at all prepared to cope with the problems.

As a libertarian, I blame mostly the idiots who chose to stay. I guess only a small minority of them were literally incapable of leaving before Katrina arrived.

Re your problem of having at least two alternative jobs to choose from: this is one of those problems that a lot of people would be glad to have. (grin)

-- Jonathan

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Indeed, the hurricane veered east at the last minute. The damage caused to Biloxi is indicative of what could have happened to New Orleans.

I honestly think that there was at least a large minority who were incapable of leaving. What this storm has exposed is an underbelly of American society that lives in deep poverty, without even 25¢ to make a phone call, let alone the money to own a car. It seems that the entire evacuation plans were predicated on the supposition that everyone owns a car. No extra public transport was laid on and no help was offered to those who would have liked to have left, but had nowhere to go and didn't have the bus fare in any case.

It's as if the authorities believe that life is like TV -- that everyone has enough cash and everyone has enough transport. If any good is going to come out of this horror, it might be that Americans realize that there is a sub-stratum of deep poverty which it has chosen to ignore.

But it looks like Fats Domino is okay, so that's alright then.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think the authorities believe that everyone lives life like on TV. I'm sure they know and understand the breakdown of their society - the question is what they could expect to do, and, how much they cared. I doubt the underbelly of poverty has now been exposed to america, but it sure has to the world. Questions relating to Kyoto will ineviatbly be raised, it's also another angle on the perils of their gun culture. But also, perhaps more importantly, how this country spends it's money, which is supposedly geared towards acting in its best interests. As poker players, we surely realise that outcomes don't always inform on poor decisions, but still, it looks like piss-poor prioritisation.

I'm not staggered that they didn't expect the breach and were caught off guard - I've no idea how likely this was, it could have been a very unlikely event (for all I know) that happened, but I am staggered by their inability to repsond to it.

chaos

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[pb9617.livejournal.com]

I honestly think that there was at least a large minority who were incapable of leaving. What this storm has exposed is an underbelly of American society that lives in deep poverty, without even 25¢ to make a phone call, let alone the money to own a car. It seems that the entire evacuation plans were predicated on the supposition that everyone owns a car. No extra public transport was laid on and no help was offered to those who would have liked to have left, but had nowhere to go and didn't have the bus fare in any case.

This is BS. The city ran FREE evacuation buses for 48 straight hours before the hurricane hit. The buses were taking people to shelters outside of the city and the superdome. The people that stayed chose not to go. Yes, I understand there were sick people and children, but there were PLENTY of adults that gambled with their lives.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[pb9617.livejournal.com]

The human problems in New Orleans now are partly because of the idiots who chose to remain when they should have got out, and partly because no level of government seems to have been at all prepared to cope with the problems.

There's no organization or government that is prepared to rescue, feed, shelter and evacuate 100,000 people in a week. None. The logistics base necessary for that sort of operation is tremendous.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[(Anonymous)]

One might suppose they aren't prepared, but they should have the capability to do so. You could store 100's of thousands of meal rations in a single warehouse, along with a supply of water. The cost to maintain this capability at strategicly placed locations over the country is small fry given other government expenditures. With the size & experience of the US Airforce, parachuting these in should not be a tough task. The problem is certainly not in the numbers but how the needy population is distributed. But even those congregated in large numbers have been suffering unacceptably.

What amazes me is that post 9/11 the requirement, or apparent requirement, for this capability increased significantly. Yet it's hard to imagine they could have coped any worse than this before.

chaos

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[pb9617.livejournal.com]

With the size & experience of the US Airforce, parachuting these in should not be a tough task.

Unorganized, unsecured drops would cause nothing less than a full-scale riot.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[(Anonymous)]

Well that is what the ground troops are there for. But in the city with a population spread out there is little chance of a riot with a drop that is spread wide and thin, as there is no focal point. I agree though that there is an argument that sees little sense in supplying half what is needed, to contain the problem far better to provide nothing - that way there is nothing to riot for, fight over.
Perhaps they were advised to wait a couple of days so they could provide the complete solution, rather than half of it and avoid the inevitable riotous consequences of a popualation, partly armed. Now this is why they have the right to bare arms.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[(Anonymous)]

ok, not untypical, but 'bear arms'

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

This quote below is from a blogger who had a cellphone conversation with Bigfoot, a bar manager on Bourbon Street, speaking on his cellphone from the convention centre.

Although obviously he has no exact count, he estimates more than 10,000 people are packed into and around and outside the convention center still waiting for the buses. They had no food, no water, and no medicine for the last three days, until today, when the National Guard drove over the bridge above them, and tossed out supplies over the side crashing down to the ground below. Much of the supplies were destroyed from the drop. Many people tried to catch the supplies to protect them before they hit the ground. Some offered to walk all the way around up the bridge and bring the supplies down, but any attempt to approach the police or national guard resulted in weapons being aimed at them.

So, on the plus side, some supplies are being "dropped" in (and no full-scale riots are being caused). On the minus side, these sound to me like what you would call "unorganized, unsecure drops".

"The buses were taking people to shelters outside of the city and the superdome.

Well. yes, but isn't this part of the problem? Buses to a place where there isn't any food or water and hardly any sanitation is a little bit like a five pound voucher towards buying a Rolls Royce.

There's no organization or government that is prepared to rescue, feed, shelter and evacuate 100,000 people in a week. None.

I really would have expected a little bit more "can do" attitude here than to just say that no other organisation or government is prepared to do it. And, to be honest, I don't see that this is a valid excuse. Your assertion appears to be that what is happening now was inevitable, that nothing could have been done to avoid this situation. This is a view not even held by the President, the Governor of Louisiana, and definitely not by the Mayor of New Orleans.

Re: Another Bush gaffe

[pb9617.livejournal.com]

So, on the plus side, some supplies are being "dropped" in (and no full-scale riots are being caused). On the minus side, these sound to me like what you would call "unorganized, unsecure drops".

Yup, because everyone is now pressuring the Guard to "Do something!"

Well. yes, but isn't this part of the problem? Buses to a place where there isn't any food or water and hardly any sanitation is a little bit like a five pound voucher towards buying a Rolls Royce.

The places that don't have power, food, water are IN THE CITY, and were to be used as a shelter of LAST RESORT.


I really would have expected a little bit more "can do" attitude here than to just say that no other organisation or government is prepared to do it. And, to be honest, I don't see that this is a valid excuse. Your assertion appears to be that what is happening now was inevitable, that nothing could have been done to avoid this situation. This is a view not even held by the President, the Governor of Louisiana, and definitely not by the Mayor of New Orleans.

Yes, something could have been done to avoid this situation -- 100,000 people could have evacuated rather than staying in the city.

An ignored form of transport

[(Anonymous)]

Well, apparently some extra public transport was laid on.

Quite apart from that, anyone without transport has the option of walking, unless very old, very young, or handicapped. There was enough notice for any healthy person to have walked slowly out of the city to somewhere safer (i.e. not below sea level and not near the sea). Maybe it's unrealistic to expect many Americans to think of that, but humans do come equipped with legs.

I'm reminded of one of Larry Niven's matter transmitter stories, in which a murderer plans to escape by matter transmitter from a remote house, but finds the thing turned off. When he's arrested at the scene of the crime, someone asks him why he didn't just walk away, across the countryside. "I never thought of that," he says.

-- Jonathan