DescentBB

Is there a question of disparity regarding the responce of the authorities between Katrina and this latest event, especially regards to race?

I ask because i see very affluent whites standing next to their luxury mansion and a governor waxing lyrical at how good things are compared to last time. Then i cast my mind back to the disaster 2 years ago.

(ps i'm not doing a TB, i'm interested to know your thoughts )

I think the issue is complicated.

I think Katrina caught people by surprise.

A hurricane, by nature, is something that happens (to a given place) in a short time-span, these fires took time to spread/develop.

The Katrina/NO disaster was something that hasn't happened in a long time, and people weren't ready for. Fires in California are something that happen relatively often, so I'm sure the rescue people are more practiced with what to do when it comes to fires in California.

That being said, I'm not going to completely eliminate the race/money factor, but it's not as simple as that being the only factor.

the Gov is damned if they do and damned if they don't at this time.

if they respond quickly it will be called a race/money issue.
if they respond slowly they will be blasted and called inept. its a no win situation

No disparity based on race that I can see.

last 3 posts are quite corresct.

It's a \"class\" issue more than a race issue. We're all just one race technically anyways: human. Different cultures and tribes do not qualify as races.

Cuda is right. It's not the governments job to placate the media, people and the disaster all at the same time.

On the other hand, you have people (more \"rich\" -in most cases- than poor as with Kata.) that live in a region that is KNOWN for a reoccurring natural disaster potential. It's kinda like people that move in next to an airport or Main rail line and complain about the noise. It's a gamble.

Sure, it's horrible when bad stuff like this happens, but these fires happen every year (or nearly) just like floods and hurricanes do in the gulf coast.

Why does it have to be a Governor's fault or a President's?

The last 4 posts are quite correct.

Let me just add ...
Comparing a Hurricane disaster and a Wild Fire disaster is like comparing apples and oranges. There are multiple differences to the dynamics involved in each.

Also, With the Katrina Hurricane disaster, people of all walks of life, race, and class were impacted and even though there was some warning, there was a lot of people who had a hard time getting to safety and support.

With these Wild Fires, a lot of the impact has been mostly in \"upper class\", wealthier neighborhoods, combined with little to no warning before evacuation. Also, with the fires there has been a lot fewer problems with the evacuations and support has been quicker and easier to get to.

With Katrina, we should have been better prepared. In our arrogance we neglected the fact that nature can and will surprise us.

With the fires, in that area it has been known to happen and has happened before (like Duper said), therefore the mechanisms were already in place to respond quickly and effectively.

Now ... the REAL test (and this applied to the Katrina mess as well) will be how we deal with AFTER the fires are over.

, or, as Rich Lowry has written ....

I live in San Diego, so its been pretty heavy on the news here, no commercial interuptions, etc. You can smell the fire/ash pretty strongly. I live about 10 miles from where the flames are and it would have to jump two free ways to get to where I live.

In contrast with Katrina, my impression from the media here is that the vast majority of the 'solutions' have come at the local level. And if I would have to draw a comparison between here and N.O., it would be that our problem was solved at the local level. It doesn't seem that FEMA is involved that much at all.

Evacuees at Petco and Qualcom stadiums have recieved such support from the local community that they have had to turn many donations away.

A second important distinction, is that a hurricain affects everyone in the city, where as a fire only effects a percentage. I imagine it is much easier to maintain order in the latter case.

I imagine if downtown San Diego or downtown L.A. was in flames, things would not be going so well.

Gooberman wrote: A second important distinction, is that a hurricain affects everyone in the city, where as a fire only effects a percentage. I imagine it is much easier to maintain order in the latter case.

I thought of that too. A hurricane effects an area that covers up 2 or 3 states! ..that's a lot of people and capitol.

Gooberman wrote:if I would have to draw a comparison between here and N.O., it would be that our problem was solved at the local level.

Probably several factors involved:

- better local government (this is not exactly high praise; doesn't take much to beat out New Orleans' govt.)
- no mass evacuation beforehand, so there are plenty of unaffected people around who can help out those who've been displaced (vs. Katrina, where a lot of people had already left the state when it hit)
- as you mentioned, the effects are of a much more limited scope. It's not as though everyone in a 3-state area got hit; only certain areas are in bad shape. This means help can be coming from your buddy 3 miles away, rather than from a FEMA crew traveling from the other side of the country.

Also, keep in mind that some of the aftermath of Katrina was heavily exaggerated in the media. With Katrina, we had reports of thousands of murders, but it turned out there were like 2 total. There was the video of the cops looting the one store, but that turned out to be an isolated incident. Thus far, we haven't seen that sort of exaggeration and misrepresentation with the CA wildfires.

All good posts.

It has been noted, though not in these words, in the Katrina disaster, the infrastructure was decimated making it near impossible to get about. Not so in Ca.

Yes, good posts. Maybe i'm just being extra sensitive when i look at world news, or world news is even more sensationalist than i thought.

One thing can't e denied though, and your posts strengthen my opinion, is that it's a shame that the political parties try to gain points on the backs of these disasters. Mind you, what with an election round the corner (a long corner) it's hardy surprising.

What I find surprising is that I haven't heard much about the illegal immigrants that live in many of the canyons that burned. I imagine that many of them were displaced. Maybe the local news is covering that side of the story but I haven't heard anything about it on the national news.

I grew up in San Diego and still have a lot of family there. So far no one has been evacuated. It's sad to see my home town burn.

TechPro wrote:With the fires, in that area it has been known to happen and has happened before (like Duper said), therefore the mechanisms were already in place to respond quickly and effectively.

This ^^

Firefighting has been around a long time and exists pretty much in every place in the U.S. where flammable stuff does. Other natural disasters are confined geographically (no hurricanes in Kansas). Or, in other instances, there's no "fighting" them, per se (can't turn a hose on a tornado). As TP says, the mechanism is already there for firefighting - and it's well developed at that.

I'm suprised no one in this thread has brought up the global warming angle of the fires I've heard discussed elsewhere.

Palzon wrote:I'm suprised no one in this thread has brought up the global warming angle of the fires I've heard discussed elsewhere.

'cause that definitely wasn't the point of the thread.

Palzon wrote:I'm suprised no one in this thread has brought up the global warming angle of the fires I've heard discussed elsewhere.

Why? Does global warming cause people to become arsonists?
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/10/25/fi ... index.html