Here is a youtube post about the conditions in Nashville, TN. They recently had a huge flood. I find it funny how many people I have spoken to recently that are educated people but have heard nothing about this flood. This just shows what the media attention in this country is about when New Orleans get tons of help and attention and everyone around the workd hears about their bad behavior and yet these people few have even heard about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFjaQoOd ... r_embedded

I heard about the floods on the news over here, but it was fairly casual news. Probably because it was so far away and was relatively minor in terms of physical victims (deaths, injured). Still, I hope everyone is fine and didn't lose too much in the flood.

Btw, I (and I think the majority of people here) didn't see the Katrina disaster as a failing of the people (rioters/looters etc), but as one of the government who didn't properly respond to the problems.

heh...yea, that's what everyone tried to portray, a failing of the federal government to provide for the poor, poor people of New Orleans.

The truth is that the same shit happens elsewhere and the people do fine. New Orleans is just full of whiny bitches who feel the government's job is to provide them with whatever they want and who can't keep their own shit together in times of trouble. East Texas was hit as hard as Louisiana by another storm and you didn't hear anything because they handled their own shit.

Anyway, in my opinion it's an example of the entitlement society, where everyone feels they're entitled to things they don't earn for themselves. The fact the media plays along with it only makes the situation worse.

My point in posting this was to show that the people of New Orleans are still crying about people not doing enough for them and then you have all of these other places and you are not hearing the same. I assure you the people of Nashville are not getting anywhere near the help the people of New Orleans received from the government and other organizations, but you don't hear them bitching about who is going to replace their houses and take care of them.

Well you gotta put things into perspective, Katrina left some 1830 dead in total, while these floodings killed about 30. Still tragic, but clearly the scope and width of this disaster isn't anywhere near that of NO.

There were a lot of factors at play in NO that complicated things too. Like the fact that it was mostly the poor side of town being hit, and we all know that poor people are generally speaking dumb as shit and didn't respond well to the calls to evacuate the city - that and the fact that the evacuation activities were poorly lead, and some people weren't mobile enough to get out (old and sick).

It's sometimes hard for us intelligent/normal people to understand how the minds of the underclass work, employed or unemployed. At my previous job I did some minor HR stuff and I've had to contact another government agency to check whether one of the cleaning ladies' kids would still be eligible for child support (he was 16) if he took up a partially paid learning contract. A pretty important matter for someone of her financial means. WHen I asked my older colleague why I had to do it instead of her doing it herself or just looking for the answer online (I found it in 15 minutes), given how small a question it really was, he told me that they just don't really 'dare' to. And even if they do call and are explained the situation, they often don't understand what's being said and just say 'yes' when asked if they understood what they had to do, hung up and never did anthing - because they were too dumb to do it and afraid to come over as dumb for asking again. Etc. Vicious cycle and all that. Point of the story is: when dealing with these people, it's not a good idea to have them assume responsbility for themselves because they are unable.

Now, we can argue about whether these people should still be given minimal government support or not, but that's another matter. I'm sure our views on government support for the poor and unemployed are culturally quite different. In short, I think they are good if they work well. There's always abuse, of course, but I think a certain level of intellectual development, personal pride and understanding of how society works all add to a decreasing likelyhood of an individual taking advantage of the system. So the poor should be given a chance to redeem themselves and, unfortunately, that only is workable through government aid. You could also drop them completely, but where that leaves them? I mean, that's basically giving up any hope on them and creating a permanent underclass which only serves as a cancer to a society.

And, as a quick addition, there were other issues in NO like racial problems (some of the talk of the white neighbourhood 'civil watch' was just downright KKK stufff) and the fact that subcontracted (by the government) private aid firms actually chased away volunteers and other people trying to rebuild the community, as they were cutting into their business.

I think Ox may have a slight opinion on the matter.

In my opinion, ultimately everyone is responsible for themselves and their place in the world. If they're too dumb or afraid to make lives for themselves, that's their fault, not mine. If the government has to help them, the government is using my taxes, which means I ultimately have to pay because this moron is too dumb or lazy or whatever to make something of himself.

I feel that government 'intervention' is ok, but not government aid. Never give someone something for nothing. All the people that require government assistance should be required to give back in the form of military or civil service. There is nothing that will build self confidence and skills like the military. Sure, it's a bit dangerous, but I think a civil equivalent (with no danger of going to war) should also exist. People that live in military-style bases and go around doing civil projects like rebuilding infrastructure (dams, bridges, roads), thereby learning self responsibility and trade skills. These kinds of people could also be first-responders in disaster situations. They should also be subject to military justice. Desertion results in jail time in a military prison.

I just feel that giving someone a check every week doesn't work. That doesn't encourage them to get skills and a job, that just encourages them to sit on their ass and keep doing what they're doing.

Slight opinion as in a slant? Or just a reference to the post's semi-massiveness?

lol @ the ST pic. I tend to disagree about the military btw, to an extent. I'm sure it can offer something like discipline and personal pride to a lot of people, but in the end, if you're a dumb fuck you're not gonna do well in the real world regardless of a military training. In the real world, people don't tell you what to do all the time. At work, sure, but even then it's not half as much of an obligation as in the army - getting laid off vs. army prison I mean. And outside of work you're totally on your own. So I dunno. It'll help, but it's not a complete answer I think.

I think most of this comes down to the same old thing again, mostly Euro vs. American views on personal responsiblity. Yes, you're responsible for your own deeds. But even if you're a brilliant person who works hard, you won't always make it. Not in the US, not here. Circumstances and environment are sometimes nigh unsurmountable. So, I feel the government has a role there. Not to indefinitely subsidize laziness, but to give people a better chance to escape poverty and marginal lives. I would even say that the levels of poverty and literacy in the North-Western European countries with such policies compared with those in the US prove that it works. Not impeccably, clearly, and I would make changes to it if it was me in charge. But still. Of course, the US also has a more wealthy, skilled and attractive 'top end' of society which counterbalances the larger poor population and a very productive middle class (if not necessarily more skilled - hours worked vs. output etc) . Both have their benefits.

Sure, but the US doesn't implement the kind of things I'd like to see done.

I agree, some people must live their lives being told what to do. That's just how they are. It's these people that make careers out of the military or my hypothetical civil service. As long as you can be productive, you can earn a living and be a good part of society.

For those people that can't even make it in the civil service, you're a waste of humanity. I don't know what I'd do with those people. Under perfect circumstances, I'd just sterilize them and shoot em into space to terraform Mars or something. Or just kill them. However, I realize that's not really realistic. I suppose we'd have to figure out something to do with the truly worthless dregs of humanity. You can't just keep them in prison... that'd be a bigger drain on society than putting them on a dole.

Still, of all people in the world that survive on welfare/dole/whatever, I'm willing to be 90% of them could and would work if properly motivated. You may have to force them at first (military/civil service), but once they properly understood the carrot and the stick, I think they'd shape up and even excel. Oh, not sure if it's implied or not, but if people join these services, they are immediately and irrevocably removed from their prior existance.. shipped to another state/country to do their duty so as to distance them from their negative past and give them a new chance.

I know, I'm such a humanitarian. Besides, with enough of these types of people opting for military service, we could invade Canada and Mexico.

Actually we need to find a planet that has uber hostile native wildlife, arm those bums with a rifle and ammo and drop them into a compound that has to be guarded every minute and everyone has to put an effort or they all die. I bet that would teach anyone who makes it what leeching means.

But terraforming mars with a hoe sounds good too.

yea, if we could somehow use science to make the martian atmosphere human-livable, I'd say just drop them up there. Unfortunately, right now you need a suit and oxygen and tons of high tech survival gear and crap, which makes it impossible. Too bad. I'm totally with dropping them on another planet where they can fight to survive or die, though. And maybe ship back some nice unobtanium or something.

Shades of Escape from New York there. And since that was an awesome movie, that must mean it's an awesome idea!!

oh yea, that was great. I'm not sure I'd want to use New York City. Can't we use a shit-hole city like Houston instead? Or London?

Detroit.

Yea, Detroit works. Or maybe the state of New Jersey. That'd give us a lot more room. Not like anyone would miss it.

Oh yeah, then you could play shoot the Guido.