Katrina fall-out

in article R7qRe.79145$084.55689@attbi_s22, Jay Honeck at
wrote on 8/31/05 3:25 PM:


Why the hell were they there? Everyone in America knew that New Orleans --
and everything for 100 miles on each side -- was about to be blasted by
Katrina.

Consider this story that I heard from a caller to a radio show today:

This man had been vacationing in New Orleans with his wife. Last Saturday,
they were told they needed to get out.

All flights were booked. There were no rental cars available. The buses had
stopped running. Desperate, the man scraped together the last of his
cash--about $200--and somehow managed to flag down one of the last taxi cabs
still operating. He and his wife were able to get out of town. Other
tourists were not so lucky. I just saw an AP story quoting a Canadian
tourist saying, "I'm not getting out of here alive".

If tourists couldn't get out, even with plenty of warning, what options do
you think poor people had?

If tourists couldn't get out, even with plenty of warning, what options do
you think poor people had?

No, you need to ask that slightly differently. "If tourists couldn't get
out, what options do you think native New Orleaneans (or whatever they are
called) had?"

I'd wager that someone who lived there would have a heckuva lot more "street
knowledge" on how to get out, than a lost tourist would.

As the story develops over time, it's all coming down to this: Those who
knew, and could, got out. Those who didn't -- or didn't care -- stayed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

in article TZWRe.82217$084.51854@attbi_s22, Jay Honeck at
wrote on 9/2/05 4:48 AM:

If tourists couldn't get out, even with plenty of warning, what options do
you think poor people had?

No, you need to ask that slightly differently. "If tourists couldn't get
out, what options do you think native New Orleaneans (or whatever they are
called) had?"

I'd wager that someone who lived there would have a heckuva lot more "street
knowledge" on how to get out, than a lost tourist would.

As the story develops over time, it's all coming down to this: Those who
knew, and could, got out. Those who didn't -- or didn't care -- stayed.

I don't know about the story you're hearing, but what I'm hearing is that a
heck of a lot of people simply had no way of leaving. Believe it or not, it
really IS that simple. Hell, I heard a woman at the N.O. Ritz Carlton
interviewed. She said the hotel was packed with (presumably well-off)
tourists just like herself, who had tried like hell to get out of town last
Saturday. These are rich people we're talking about, Jay--people who can
charter a plane if they have to. And THEY couldn't get out.

But all of this begs a much larger question: if the people of New Orleans
had "plenty of warning", and should be held accountable for not getting out
in time, why in the hell are their so many apologists for the feds not being
prepared?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:13:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
W1iRe.295446$_o.49447@attbi_s71::

I wonder if the insurance companies (and the federal government) will
FINALLY wake up to the fact that building permanent structures below
sea-level in a hurricane zone is folly?

I can understand how your computer malfunctions might be obliquely
construed as aviation related, on-topic, for this newsgroup, but I
completely fail to see how the subject of this article differs from
obnoxious spam. Or has this newsgroup become Jay's sandbox?

I'd much rather it become Jay's sandbox than your septic tank.

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 23:05:33 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in : :

I'd much rather it become Jay's sandbox than your septic tank.

I guess I expect to much from fellow aviators. :-(

I was wondering how long it would be before one of you OT crie babies
would start crying again.

Bryan "The Monk" Chaisone

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:W1iRe.295446$_o.49447@attbi_s71...
I wonder if the insurance companies (and the federal government) will
FINALLY wake up to the fact that building permanent structures below
sea-level in a hurricane zone is folly?

Just in the last couple of years (after paying out billions to re-build
homes along the Mississippi -- again) these two entities have wised up and
essentially prohibited building homes and businesses in flood zones.

Seems like a good idea...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Let's keep in mind that a good part of New Orleans was built before
insurance companies told us what we can and can not do.

What I don't understand is why the insurance companies let them keep
building houses on the sides of cliffs in California.

A) Who said they are insured?

B) Government decide what is built where not the insurance company.

C) For a sufficient premium, most anything could be insured.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:RQjRe.6899

What I don't understand is why the insurance companies let them keep
building houses on the sides of cliffs in California.

"sfb" writes:

A) Who said they are insured?

B) Government decide what is built where not the insurance company.

Zoning and such controls what is possible. But, unless you're paying
cash for your entire building process, the people you're borrowing
money from also get a say. Most of them insist on insurance as a
condition of the loan. And it seems completely reasonable (and also
properly libertarian) for insurance companies to get to decide what
things they'll write coverage on.

C) For a sufficient premium, most anything could be insured.

Sure, but the premium may be larger than the cost of building the
replacement, so it's not very useful.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

Surprise, surprise, but many folks building on the beach or hillsides
have buckets and buckets of money, pay cash without blinking an eye, and
think nothing of going naked if they can't get insurance especially
since the land is often worth more than the building.

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
"sfb" writes:

A) Who said they are insured?

B) Government decide what is built where not the insurance company.

Zoning and such controls what is possible. But, unless you're paying
cash for your entire building process, the people you're borrowing
money from also get a say. Most of them insist on insurance as a
condition of the loan. And it seems completely reasonable (and also
properly libertarian) for insurance companies to get to decide what
things they'll write coverage on.

C) For a sufficient premium, most anything could be insured.

Sure, but the premium may be larger than the cost of building the
replacement, so it's not very useful.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/