Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP Did anyone else see the following story? <a href="http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHome/RealKatrinaHeroWalMartStudySays.aspx" target="_blank">http://articles.moneycentral.m...ays.aspx</a> I don't know how old it is, but it states that Wal-Mart did a better job of responding to Katrina than FEMA. (Well, my 4 month old son could have done a better job than FEMA, but that's another topic.) Other for profit businesses were also complemented as well as the Coast Gaurd. I found it interesting.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I'm not sure that being efficient and well organized makes one a "good guy".
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains One has to wonder if this story was put out to offset this one <a href="http://thenews.choate.edu/2008/04/04/Opinion/Wal-Mart_Cares_More_for_Pr.php" target="_blank">http://thenews.choate.edu/2008...r_Pr.php</a> Granted wal-mart has since revisited this desicion - it was only after public outcry and a story on a prime - time news program!
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP Wal-Mart is certainly no angel. It does show though that there is no substitute for local knowledge. Unfortunatly Katrina did a good job of wiping out local services. I get the impression that the local and state Governments in New Oreleans assumed that the Feds would be able to swoop in and fix all their problems, while the Feds where only prepared to assist and strengthen local efforts, which basiclly didn't exisit. If your community isn't prepared to do a large part in taking care of your community issues you're in a world of hurt.
Originally Posted By Elderp New Orleans should be under water in my opinion. Or at the very least it should be a smaller city than what it is currently. I think there was way too much reliance on the Feds, I am sorry but if your taxes can't handle the services then it shouldn't be incorporated.
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains Hmm - don't all areas effected by natural disasters depend on Federal Funding? Many parts of Ca have benifited from fed funding with the wild fires and flooding over the past few years - The difference is New Orleans was preventable if the Levies had been maintained properly - and that wasn't a city issue was it?
Originally Posted By Elderp Interesting you mention the disasters in CA. I happen to live in the San Bernardino Mountains which have several times been affected by the fire. My town has several times tried to incorporate into a city, but the fact is we can't do it because we can't afford it. Therefore we get less services and therefore less people live where I am at. Here is a different question: Who should be responsible for the levies? The city incorporated the land in and arround the levies and therefore it should in my opinion be responsible for the levies. The other question that comes to my mind is that of: Should the Federal government build levies that they can't maintain?
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains Who built the levies to begin with? That is who should be responsible for the upkeep of said levies - We had levies flood in central CA didn't the feds bail out the farmers there too? And I thought those levies were built for the farmers by the counties (but could be mistaken) When we had the big earthquake in 89 the feds came in - and parts of SF were built on built up marshes and the feds helped them too!
