No....sorry, but if the national weather service comes on TV three to four days prior to a hurricane of astronomical proportions slamming into my home on the Gulf Coast.....I am moving my family out of there without question. Don't be an idiot. I think most of us would sacrifice a home and traditions so as to not be killed. I can take my insurance and build a new home.

And how many of them actually had insurance...let alone flood insurance? And to quote you - don't be an idiot!

If you don't have insurance, that sucks. Its nobody's fault but yours. However, staying in town will have no effect on whether your house gets destroyed or not.

People don't have health insurance, people don't have life insurance, people don't have flood insurance...all for one reason or another! Yet why are we being judgmental or hard on people when we don't know their personal circumstances!

Because we think its ridiculous to hear about how the government failed them.

And for some they have...that is their reality...

How have they failed them?

I said for some they have - that is THEIR reality! Not MY reality!

So what you're saying is, because some people blame the government, the government has failed them? The government rarely fails people in reality, because its not their role to begin with.

So you think the government is innocent in all things? I don't think so. I do support President Bush; however, he has made some mistakes, as with every President and/or government entity! Certain politicians make people beleive what they want to believe and then in turn make choices contrary to what they've agreed to. Thus the life of a politician.

No, the government obviously makes mistakes. What I'm saying is that many of those "mistakes" are based upon ridiculous expectations of citizens. I think that is the situation with the majority of Katrina issues, people expecting more than they should from the government.

Can't really argue with you there...that is a valid point..and that is why a majority of people have been hurt...

I'm not being an idiot. You claimed that "most of us wouldn't leave our homes or heritage".....and I refuted your claim. I don't know how many did, nor is it my concern. Frankly, I wouldn't live on the gulf coast, let alone somewhere below sea level on the gulf coast if I didn't have the means to have something as basic as flood insurance.

That's definitely your choice! But how many people have the choice to move from a place that they were born (without the financial means)?

"The United States said federal and Louisiana state authorities were examining many of the issues raised by the committee."

Getting back on topic, I'm not going to spend any time defending the UN -- I worked there most of last summer for a contractor managing their radio, TV and Conference engineers, and there are a lot of things wrong there.

However, the quote above -- from the US Government -- would seem to indicate that this report is not entirely off base.

What is your point? That we all have to do stuff to get stuff? Is that what passes for a 'struggle' these days? It's a dramatic as heck word. I still contend that the very fact that someone is working a minimum wage job is their own fault. You don't end up as an adult with no marketable skills without having any input into the situation yourself. It was an option to finish high school and then go to some college/votech program to learn marketable skills. There may have been an apprenticeship position somewhere. Job Corps is available. Yeah, I guess they all require you to do stuff in order to get stuff and thus "struggle," but really.. so what? Am I supposed to feel sorry for some idiot who chose to drop out of high school and have babies thinking that their job at White Castle would provide?

And actually, if they weren't taking care of things themselves, e.g., owning a car, having flood insurance, etc., then they were relying on someone else. New Orleans has flooded before. Everyone who lives there knows or should know that the levee system is inadequate for some storms. Everyone knew or should have known that such a storm was a decent possibility. Therefore, if they weren't prepared for the eventuality of a storm, then they were expecting someone else to be prepared for them. There is no truth to your statement that they weren't dependant on someone else. Show me one minimum wage worker that isn't also receiving some sort of government benefit -- TANF, WIC, Section 8 Housing, etc.

The new minimum wage hike, if it get signed, is a government benefit. I've never understood how people can claim to support domestic small business growth, and then try to raise the minimum wage as if it will help. Maybe its just me, but a lot of the minimum wage earners I've come in contact with, aren't worth 7 bucks and an hour.

The thing is, you're looking at the situation from your own perspective. From where you sit in your cushy little life, it's easy to say what is someone's "fault" and what is an "excuse." I mean, come on -- "it was your own decision not to go to school" -- WTF? Because a 10 year old should be held accountable for not going to school when mommy doesn't make him? A little kid can determine that his mom is an "effup" and ensure that he doesn't grow up the same way? If mom being an "effup" and you not going to school is all you have known for your entire life and you do not have the perspective of someone who has enjoyed relative privilege, such as ktsnake how do you even KNOW that there is an alternative, much less how to make it happen?

I don't know -- it's pretty clear that you've seen the worst of people who've been screwups or who've taken advantage of the system. Sometimes, there are people whose lives are SO jacked from SUCH a young age that it's nearly impossible for them to achieve the level of success you seem to think is possible.

Someone else mentioned the "lazy, ignorant people" who stayed in N.O. during Katrina -- I would find it VERY hard to believe that most of the people who stayed did so because they were lazy or ignorant. If you're really poor, you don't have a car. You don't have money for bus tickets. You don't have money to pay for a hotel somewhere or to eat at restaurants or do whatever you have to do to survive after leaving home. WTF are you supposed to do?

I would have to disagree with you. Let's say that there is a family who has had a nice corporate job with a nice salary and benefits; however, s/he gets laid off because of cutbacks. Even though s/he has marketing skills and a great educational background, its been difficult to obtain new employment, thus sacrificing yet not relying on any government assistance and gets a job that only pays minimum wage.

So the question that I have for you is...where are you getting your statistcs and/or proof that those who earn minimum wage are receiving some form of assistance?

There's a possibility that I'm right...there's a possibility that you are right....we can not speak for the majority EITHER WAY because more than likely we DO NOT have the facts.

So what exactly is your point? The family has to do things to get things. First off, they're entitled to unemployment benefits. When those run out, if they still haven't found a job, there's always freelance work for people with decent skillsets.

My aunt found herself in the same position not too long ago. She and her husband started up something called the "CEO College," training CEOs to deal with the public relations aspects of their jobs. They're now doing quite well, and they're completely self-sufficient.

100% of people who work for minimum wage are eligible for benefits. Whether or not they take advantage is at their sole discretion.

100%.

Okay -- whose fault is it? Who ultimately suffers? Have you never met a self-determined 10-year-old? I see these myths debunked on an almost daily basis. My wife teaches in a school that actively recruits kids from our local failing public schools, and has an intensive program to get them to college. More than half are minorities, 3/4 of them are on free lunch programs, most come from broken families, most are first generation college, and quite a few of them have parents who are screwups/junkies/etc. These kids motivate themselves to attend a high school that can't afford to air condition itself, works their kids butts off (they offer only Advanced Placement courses), and they get into college.

Some of the kids they get require a lot of remediation because their previous schools had failed them, and they have the AVID program for that. These kids get it though. They, for the most part understand that if they want to have a better life, that's 100% on them. There are no victims.

By the way, these types of schools are becoming more and more common throughout the U.S. So I do know for a fact that there is a choice, and I know for a fact that there are quite a few kids that do avail themselves of these types of opportunities.

I don't believe that's possible. I think someone has to give up before they can be a failure. I believe that we can all overcome whatever obstacle life throws in our way so long as we are physically and mentally able. I do believe that society has a duty to take care of its physically and mentally infirm. Beyond that though? I think people ought to be responsible for their own lives as much as possible. There should of course be assistance for those who want to improve their lives (student loans, job corps, remedial education programs), but otherwise, I'm not a big fan of the welfare system.


One cannot become poor unless one decides that being too poor to own a car is okay. Living below sea level during hurricane season and not having a means of escape is very lazy/ignorant.

Yet there is a thing called PRIDE that some people would not enlist government assistance nor would they seek after unemployment benefits (a company would have to agree to that anyway - ask anyone in HR).

And how many people have the will-power to begin something like this! Again, you are talking about personal experience and not something that happens 90% percent of the time (if not greater).


I agree...they maybe eligible but that doesn't mean that they will tap into that resource.

You honestly believe that???

Regardless of how people became poor, what do you propose we do about it? I don't blame poor people entirely, I realize they have obstacles. Of course, it can be overcome with the right amount of effort, but I know they sometimes have the deck stacked against them. However, regardless, I still don't see it as the government's job. The blame on people in New Orleans didn't really begin until they began to blame their government. What happened was a tragedy. We'll learn from it, but when I hear the black community place the fault on the administration, it makes me less sympathetic.

I believe that there are already (as mentioned by another poster) programs available that would enable a person to establish a better way of life for them. It's up to those people to access such programs. And I agree blaming the government for a lack of programs is not just nor does it have merit.

However, with Hurricane Katrina, I wouldn't necessarily cast total blame on the government either. I believe they made some mistakes but I can't blame them for TOTAL misfortune and tragedy! It wasn't just the black community placing blame on the administration, it was also caucasians who were affected as well. You saw a predominance of black people; however, there were others in the mix. Because I'm sure Slidell has a heavy caucasian population and not black.

Well, I'm sure white people were frustrated as well, but its not the individuals who were involved that really irks me. Its the disconnected folks, like the NAACP, and other organizations who acted as though Bush and co. made a decision to abandon the city.

So are you upset because someone gave them (NAACP) the authority to speak on their (the black community) behalf? And no one spoke up for "caucasians"?

Well, I wouldnt say upset, annoyed. I don't think much at all is the fault of the government, but if people in the city blame them, thats fine. I mean, people in stressful situation need to vent, I understand grief. However, it was the political orgs getting involved, the DNC, the NAACP, that was ridiculous. They know the role of the government in such situations, yet still blasted the administration to score some political points.

Which didn't work because if they truly had a problem with the government...I'm sure Nagin wouldn't have been reelected on the local level.

I think thats a little unrealistic though. Obviously the NOLA black community would probably me more forgiving of a black democrat than a white republican who they already hate.

There aren't as many blacks remaining in the area as there are caucasians...so who was the voting majority?

Well, I'm not sure what your point is, but they bused black residents from Atlanta to vote, and I've heard they did similar things in Houston. I don't know why you'd disagree with me that the black community has placed quite a bit of blame on the administration.

There is no doubt in my mind that there were white people who were upset and spoke out about the breakdown of the state and local goverment and the fact that the FEMA director was a moron. But, you didn't see it on the same level as you saw the outcry from the black community.....who pretty much blamed everything on Bush. The black community loved Nagin, and I don't think they took the time to realize that he was at fault probobly the most out of anyone.

Of course any possibility to make the Black community look idiotic and like free-loaders, the media will jump on that...I'm sure there were complaints and the like by our counterparts.

Sigh, or perhaps that stuff really happened.

Pride is a personal choice. When you've sucked at life enough to get yourself into such a hole, you have nothing to be proud of. At any rate, even if you don't believe that, you're still admitting it's a personal choice which I've been arguing all along. Looks like we're basically on the same page.

You're arguing that there is no personal choice involved. I'm citing examples proving that you can't make such sweeping generalizations. That anyone can overcome difficulty in their life proves that it can be done. If it can be done, we're talking about a personal choice existing to succeed or fail, no matter what.

Personal choice.

I can't see any other alternative. It's harsh, but you can make excuses for failure all you want. At the end of the day, it's still failure.

I agree with you...in the end it is about personal choice! It's about deciding whether you will continue to be in the minority or if you will be in the top percentage of Americans - those who are working, aiming for a better life, and "struggling" as I say to pay bills and make ends meet from month to month. Of course, as stated above, again, it is about personal choice! I can't refute you on that.

Back to the sub-argument about minimum wage, the 2 dollar minimum wage hike failed in the Senate.

Unfortunately though, so did reductions to the death (estate) tax...

I'd be all for any kind of tax cut as long as we could figure out first where we were going to cut the spending to pay for the tax cut. As it stands, the estate tax was only going to affect estates valued at over 2 million dollars. I know that the rich share a disproportionate amount of the tax burden, and I strongly believe that they should be the first to receive tax cuts, but before we cut taxes anywhere, we need to find some federal spending to cut at the same time.

An 8.5 trillion dollar deficit is going to catch up with us one of these days.