MyFox
 

A_Jive_Soul_Bro's Blog

by A_Jive_Soul_Bro from Hales Cornors

Last Post 44 days, 23 hours Ago


Wow is it amazing how much smoother evacuations in cities go when the individuals of that city are civilized. 500,000 people were evacuated from their homes in San Diego. Unlike New Orleans, 2 years ago, they actually left. But similar to New Orleans, they seeked shelter in the local stadium, Qualcomm Stadium. I have yet to hear any hidious stories and rukus in San Diego that I heard about New Orleans. No shooting at help, looting and little complaining.

 

I see this as not a race issue, but a class issue. These are 2 different situations that have some similarities. Do you see similarities? Why do you think San Diego is going much smoother?

10 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 10
Page 1 of 1
steveincanton read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 10:19 AM

#1 the peoplein CA were told to evacuate and they did! Some had as little as 10 minutes!!!In new Orleans the local goverment was told to evacuate days befor and did nothing!
#2 In New Orleans all evacuation roads were cut off and instantly 250,000 homes were destroyed!
#3 most of the homes in CA were insured and were owned! In NO a majority of the homes etc. were uninsured rentals!

steveincanton read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 10:25 AM

#4 California has known and experienced the fire risk since the 1700s and more should have been done to insure the safety or there shouldnt have been homes built there!
In New Orleans they also have known of their problem 100s of years and have chose to build on a flood plane!

GITRDONE read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 11:22 AM

Don't people research an area before deciding to move there? I'm sorry, but if I were thinking about moving, I would not move to a place known for flooding, rampid fires, hurricanes, Tsunamis, earthquakes, mud-slides, or the like. And if by chance, I moved to a place and experienced something of this nature, I would get the h e l l out of there as fast as my legs could carry me. I would not come back after the disaster and REBUILD !!!

Earwig read my blog
Oct 25, 2007 | 11:40 AM

You answered your own question with the first line in your thread. Civilized people do what needs to be done without waiting for the Government to help them. That didn't happen in N.O.

A_Jive_Soul_Bro read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 1:26 PM

I just want to get some conversation going on this topic. It's very interesting to me, and I do not want to draw any false conclusions.

aaro-nf read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 5:38 PM

i feel bad for the people who lost all their homes in that area that is destroyed by those wildfires in california. i am glad though that the evacuation did not turn into chaos in southern california.

MrsTracy read my blog view my photos
Oct 25, 2007 | 11:37 PM

#1 the peoplein CA were told to evacuate and they did! Some had as little as 10 minutes!!!In new Orleans the local goverment was told to evacuate days befor and did nothing!

Weren't those people told at least two or three DAYS before that they would have to evacuate and that there were buses to get them out? Is it the local, state, or federal governments responsibility to personally invite and drag each person or family out? I seem to remember people staying because "nobody is going to tell me to leave my house" And most of those were the same people who complained that the rescue was not quick enough.

volkd read my blog view my photos
Oct 26, 2007 | 3:02 PM

In CA the local goverment had an emergency plan. In NO they still do not have an emergency plan years later.

ColbyDog read my blog view my photos
Oct 28, 2007 | 10:01 AM

Well one could say that having black smoke fill the air making day seem like night, having night seem like day because the sky was red with fire glow, and the intense santa anna winds howling and hot at nearly 90mph.... could have been indications that heeding evacuation requests was a good idea... but I'm just guessing.

Mcyrulik read my blog view my photos
Dec 19, 2007 | 7:17 PM

To be blunt, which Im sure some will dislike about me, here are the reasons San Diegans and New Orleans-ians are different....1)while many of us east of the California border consider them an extreme liberal state, they are very well schooled in natural disasters. They do not rely on their nanny-state politics to guide them through such disasters. Unlike in Louisiana, nanny-state politics rule and the people of New Orleans are bound to that way of life. Its exactly like MrsTracy stated so eloquently....the same people who said "hell no, we wont go" are the same people who said, our government left us to die with no help whatsoever. Come on, realists like myself will never rely on the government to ever help me keep my family safe. I will do whatever I can do to accomplish that, without looking to the government for anything. Sure, maybe the homes in Cali were insured, but don't blame the people for having insurance. I live in small town in Northeast Wisconsin, no flood plane, no threat of earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, or any other major natural disaster. But guess what? My wife and I carry full coverage homeowners insurance. Does that mean that if by some act of God, I am able to get my home and my personal belongings replaced I am some kind of an affluent, non-caring person? No, I think it means I am a responsible, smart individual who sees the big picture, not just the dollar signs I might save from not carrying insurance. The disaster in the south affected more than just those in Neworlwans remember, but why is it we dont hear people from Mississippi whining and com

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




A_Jive_Soul_Bro

I am a secular athiest, residing in Milwaukee hoping to see more diversity within this city. I am frusterated with our country's domestic and foreign policies and ashamed to be an American. I enjoy blogging because it gives me a chance to voice for those who are poor and less fortunate than the supposed affluent in this city.

Member Since: 1/28/2007