09-06-2005, 08:11 PM

"Mark Hickey" <> wrote in message
news:...
    > ThingMaker <> wrote:

    > Bottom line - if Bush HAD spent every dollar that he could have spent
    > without any budget cuts, the situation would have been exactly the
    > same today, and we would have thrown a bunch of tax dollars down the
    > drain.

I belive he could have protected New Orleans dikes up to a category 5
hurricane, for the cost of a day or two`s operations in Iraq.

LA

09-06-2005, 08:13 PM

Petal and Leif wrote:
    > "Mark Hickey" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> ThingMaker <> wrote:
    >> Bottom line - if Bush HAD spent every dollar that he could have spent
    >> without any budget cuts, the situation would have been exactly the
    >> same today, and we would have thrown a bunch of tax dollars down the
    >> drain.
    > I belive he could have protected New Orleans dikes up to a category 5
    > hurricane, for the cost of a day or two`s operations in Iraq.

If you believe that then I've got some LA marshland to sell you.

Oh, wait...

09-07-2005, 04:33 AM

    >The New Orleans system has NEVER been designed to withstand more than
    >a category 3 hurricane. There have been options on the table for
    >DECADES to upgrade the system to withstand a category 4-5 hurricane,
    >but NO ONE wanted to spend the money. Not New Orleans, not any of the
    >administrations who were in office at the time.
    >Yet somehow this becomes "Bush's fault"?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/03/op...rticle_popular

Ron Fournier of The Associated Press reported that the Army Corps of
Engineers asked for $105 million for hurricane and flood programs in New
Orleans last year. The White House carved it to about $40 million. But
President Bush and Congress agreed to a $286.4 billion pork-filled highway
bill with 6,000 pet projects, including a $231 million bridge for a small,
uninhabited Alaskan island.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    >Bottom line - if Bush HAD spent every dollar that he could have spent
    >without any budget cuts, the situation would have been exactly the
    >same today, and we would have thrown a bunch of tax dollars down the
    >drain.

Yes thanks to Bush the taxpayers saved $1 on preventive measures that
could well have made the critical difference for every $1000 of our
government tax dollars down the drain on hurricane related damage and for
every $5000 or so loss to the GNP and infrastructure. But more serious than
the tax money wasted are the thousands if not tens of thousands of American
lives wasted.

The idea that Bush did a good thing by not spending the $105 million is
preposterous since it represents about %0.0001 of the cost of the disaster
thru not only tax dollars but lost GNP and infrastructure. Let's have
a little common sense please.

09-07-2005, 05:08 AM

<> wrote:
    >>The New Orleans system has NEVER been designed to
    >>withstand more than a category 3 hurricane. <snip>
    >>Yet somehow this becomes "Bush's fault"?

To me, a major part of the "fault" lies at the desk of the FEMA
director. FEMA has long been the dumping ground of political
appointees. This one was fired as a the producer of a horse
show about five years ago, and until this week didn't know the
meaning of the phrase, "joint operations center." Golly, I have
to wonder who appointed that clown?

09-07-2005, 02:45 PM

wrote:

    >Yes thanks to Bush the taxpayers saved $1 on preventive measures that
    >could well have made the critical difference for every $1000 of our
    >government tax dollars down the drain on hurricane related damage and for
    >every $5000 or so loss to the GNP and infrastructure. But more serious than
    >the tax money wasted are the thousands if not tens of thousands of American
    >lives wasted.
    >The idea that Bush did a good thing by not spending the $105 million is
    >preposterous since it represents about %0.0001 of the cost of the disaster
    >thru not only tax dollars but lost GNP and infrastructure. Let's have
    >a little common sense please.

Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.
Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years
had been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.
Period. There have been proposals to upgrade the system to something
that WOULD withstand a category 5 storm, but no one (including plenty
of former presidents) ever made it happen (nor would it have been a
particularly good idea, from what I've read).

To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be uninformed
or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to blame someone
for everything that happens - but in this case, there's plenty of
blame to go around, and very little of it would logically land at
GWB's feet.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

09-07-2005, 03:01 PM

In article <>, Mark Hickey
<> wrote:
    >Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
    >levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.
    >Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years
    >had been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
    >not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.
Interestingly enough, I was talking to an oldster retired from
the Corp of Engineers. He says that their records show that the Corp
wanted to BUILD the things originally to withstand Cat 5.
In the land of unintended consequences, the system itself has
ended up actually adding to the problems. Since they divert the
river and thus the silt, the delta has been shrinking for many
years. This means less "front yard" so to speak to "soak up" the
storm surges.

__________________
The difference between being diplomatic and undiplomatic is the
difference between saying "When I look at you time stands still"
and "Your face could stop a clock." ~~ Anon.

09-07-2005, 03:21 PM

In article <>,
Mark Hickey <> wrote:

    > wrote:
    >
    > >Yes thanks to Bush the taxpayers saved $1 on preventive measures that
    > >could well have made the critical difference for every $1000 of our
    > >government tax dollars down the drain on hurricane related damage and for
    > >every $5000 or so loss to the GNP and infrastructure. But more serious than
    > >the tax money wasted are the thousands if not tens of thousands of American
    > >lives wasted.
    > >
    > >The idea that Bush did a good thing by not spending the $105 million is
    > >preposterous since it represents about %0.0001 of the cost of the disaster
    > >thru not only tax dollars but lost GNP and infrastructure. Let's have
    > >a little common sense please.
    >
    > Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
    > levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.
    > Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years
    > had been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
    > not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.
    > Period. There have been proposals to upgrade the system to something
    > that WOULD withstand a category 5 storm, but no one (including plenty
    > of former presidents) ever made it happen (nor would it have been a
    > particularly good idea, from what I've read).
    >
    > To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be uninformed
    > or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to blame someone
    > for everything that happens - but in this case, there's plenty of
    > blame to go around, and very little of it would logically land at
    > GWB's feet.
    >
    > Mark Hickey

You are right, there is plenty of blame to go around, and I'm sure there
will be a continuous string of fingers pointing for quite some time.

But GWB deserves nearly every bit of the blame his administration is
taking, as do the state and local officials.

The response to the issue is and was totally FUBAR!

And while I certainly hope I'm wrong, if this had happened in one of our
more affluent urban areas, I can't help thinking that the response would
have been quicker and more effective.

09-07-2005, 04:33 PM

Mark Hickey wrote:
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yes thanks to Bush the taxpayers saved $1 on preventive measures that
    >>could well have made the critical difference for every $1000 of our
    >>government tax dollars down the drain on hurricane related damage and for
    >>every $5000 or so loss to the GNP and infrastructure. But more serious than
    >>the tax money wasted are the thousands if not tens of thousands of American
    >>lives wasted.
    >>The idea that Bush did a good thing by not spending the $105 million is
    >>preposterous since it represents about %0.0001 of the cost of the disaster
    >>thru not only tax dollars but lost GNP and infrastructure. Let's have
    >>a little common sense please.
    >
    >
    > Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
    > levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.
    > Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years
    > had been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
    > not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.
    > Period. There have been proposals to upgrade the system to something
    > that WOULD withstand a category 5 storm, but no one (including plenty
    > of former presidents) ever made it happen (nor would it have been a
    > particularly good idea, from what I've read).
    >
    > To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be uninformed
    > or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to blame someone
    > for everything that happens - but in this case, there's plenty of
    > blame to go around, and very little of it would logically land at
    > GWB's feet.
    >

Actually the problem happed long before GWB came to power, and could
have existed before GWB was even born. It belongs at the feet of the
idiot who decided to build on the deltas and marshes, that were the
natural protection for the higher ground in the first place.

Knowing that now, they should restore the deltas and marshes, and build
the city higher up, and further in.

W

09-08-2005, 02:22 AM

(Kurt Ullman) wrote:

    >In article <>, Mark Hickey
    ><> wrote:
    >>Yes, please - let's. There has been plenty of money spent on the NO
    >>levee system, yet it would NOT have mattered had more been spent.
    >>Even if the full amount requested every year for the last few years
    >>had been spent - the same result would have occurred. The system was
    >>not designed to withstand the amount of water Katrina brought into it.

    > Interestingly enough, I was talking to an oldster retired from
    >the Corp of Engineers. He says that their records show that the Corp
    >wanted to BUILD the things originally to withstand Cat 5.
    > In the land of unintended consequences, the system itself has
    >ended up actually adding to the problems. Since they divert the
    >river and thus the silt, the delta has been shrinking for many
    >years. This means less "front yard" so to speak to "soak up" the
    >storm surges.

And the diversion of the silt that formerly added to the delta's land
mass and countered the natural subsidence no longer gets to the
populated areas, meaning that anything built on the non-French Quarter
part of NO has been sinking for well over a century. I've also read
studies that indicate that even if they DID build the Cat5 system, a
really big storm would still create such a storm surge that it would
still innundate it and the system would then just hold the water in.

Bottom line, don't build under sea level in an area subject to Cat5
storms. Call me paranoid...

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

09-08-2005, 02:26 AM

Lloyd Parsons <> wrote:

    > Mark Hickey <> wrote:

    >> To truly believe that this disaster is GWB's fault is to be uninformed
    >> or just naive. It's normal in our culture to want to blame someone
    >> for everything that happens - but in this case, there's plenty of
    >> blame to go around, and very little of it would logically land at
    >> GWB's feet.
    >You are right, there is plenty of blame to go around, and I'm sure there
    >will be a continuous string of fingers pointing for quite some time.
    >But GWB deserves nearly every bit of the blame his administration is
    >taking, as do the state and local officials.

I've got less than no problem with those who are calling for better
response from the feds and FEMA... none at all. But there's no way to
believe that those who are unconcerned about the horrible local
government's handling of the crisis, but are rev'd up about GWB's
personal involvement are doing so for anything other than political
reasons.

    >The response to the issue is and was totally FUBAR!

State and local - you betcha. The feds could have done better too,
they were later than they should have been, but that, in the grand
scheme of things - particularly considering the amazing job they've
done after they did arrive - is a relatively small part of the
problem, IMHO.

    >And while I certainly hope I'm wrong, if this had happened in one of our
    >more affluent urban areas, I can't help thinking that the response would
    >have been quicker and more effective.

If only because the more afluent urban areas might tend to elect more
responsible local and state government... (think "Florida").

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame