Who is responsible for Katrina?
Lots of people are blogging on Hurricane Katrina and the question of who is responsible for the devastation. The media, concentrated in New York and Washington, the power centers for the federal government and for national -- as opposed to local -- interests, thinks, not surprisingly, that the federal government is responsible and, also not surprisingly, that President Bush is responsible. Let me put my two cents in. Some threshold observations are in order.
First, no one is responsible for the hurricane itself. Insurance policies often contain "acts of God" clauses for a reason -- because there are things beyond control of any human agency. Things happen. We live in an imperfect world. It's the weather. Etc. Anyone who doesn't understand this is an infant and should not be listened to.
Second, no one is responsible for the New Orleans levees breaching. I'm sorry, but saying that this event was foreseen by scientists and engineers is not good enough. Scientists and engineers can foresee a lot of things that might have some probability of occurring that would cause us harm if they occur. But that doesn't mean that in a world of scarce resources -- I'm using the term in the sense it's used by economists -- that anyone is at fault for deciding that resources are better spent on things other than preparing for a disaster that may never happen. A California earthquake could happen -- does that mean that we should invest scarce resources to rebuild every building in California so that it can withstand even the strongest earthquake? A comet could strike the Earth -- does that mean that we should invest trillions of dollars in space-based super weapons that could shoot it out of the sky? We could have saved every house in New Orleans if we'd spent hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild them all on steel-reinforced concrete stilts 30 feet above the ground. But reasonable people decided that wasn't a good use of resources. Indeed, the notion is so absurd that no reasonable person ever proposed it. So quit talking about how we should have spent billions to create a Cat 5 hurricane-resistant levee.
Third, the devastation, while difficult for the country and tragic for many individual families and communities, is not that bad. The death toll appears to be much lower than the doomsayers in the media were predicting, although with fairness they were getting their information from doomsayers in government, largely from the New Orleans city government. The property damage, while significant, is, frankly, a drop in the bucket -- pardon the pun -- of the incredible American economic engine. We have an $11-12 trillion economy this year and every year. We can absorb a one-time hit of $100-200 billion without a whole lot of trouble.
Fourth, logistics are not without costs. People apparently expect the federal government to have in place what amounts to a permanent fountain of goods and a permanent army of relief workers ready to descend instantaneously and almost in a frictionless manner on any disaster of any size. Who pays this supposed army of relief workers? Who pays to build all these storage facilities all over the country? Who pays for all these goods that we believe should be ready at a moment's notice? Who pays indeed. Again, one of the reasons why disaster relief is not frictionless is because we have better uses for our resources than simply having trained people and mountains of goods sitting around waiting for a disaster to strike.
So the question is more precisely phrased: "Who is responsible for any additional deaths or unnecessary misery that may have occurred because the reaction to the hurricane or the flooding wasn't as quick or as competent as it should have been given the resources available?"
Here are my quick thoughts, and you'll note there is a principled structure to this outline:
1) Fathers of the children of New Orleans. Approximately 60% of the births in New Orleans are to unwed mothers. A disproportionate share of the people who didn't make it out of New Orleans were unwed mothers and their small children. Where were their fathers? If I leave my kid unattended at the playground for five minutes the people I know start thinking I'm a bad dad. Why the double standard? You know why. Well, I won't play. If you let your kid suffer in a hurricane you are a rat bastard, period. The smallest platoons are the families. A sergeant (dad) who deserts his platoon is a coward and a deserter, period. I don't care if you're poor, I don't care if you're black, white, yellow, green, or purple. Dads don't leave their kids in a storm, period.
2) Children of the elderly of New Orleans. Another disproportionate share of the people who apparently didn't make it out of New Orleans were the elderly and infirm in hospitals and old folks' homes. Where were their children? Why do we abandon our elderly like this? This is, of course, a bigger question than Katrina, but I am not willing to absolve real children of real parents and blame bureaucrats instead. If you let your Momma die of neglect, the nurses and the doctors and the other workers at the hospital and home are simply the agents of that neglect; you are the principal, and the negligence should be imputed to you.
The upshot of (1) and (2) is obvious -- the strongest and best protector of people is the family. There is no substitute.
3) Neighbors. Neighbors don't let their friends and neighbors drown or starve or die of thirst. Neighbors don't prey on their neighbors. The strong must help the weak.
4) Local government. Mayor Nagin screwed the pooch and appears to be content to keep on screwin'. Enough said. This fellow was a disgrace -- the hundreds of City school buses and municipal buses sitting unused and waterlogged throughout the city are all you need to know.
If he was a white Republican and not a black Democrat he would have already been tarred and feathered.
5) State government. Ditto for Katherine Blanco. What an empty suit she is! I wouldn't let her run a Parish fundraiser.
Obviously, (4) and (5) also point to the long history of corruption and incompetence in New Orleans and Louisiana.
6) Senators from Louisiana. Has anybody done a Lexis search on how many times Mary Landrieu or John Breaux are on the record asking for massive new government spending on New Orleans levees and Louisiana flood control and hurricane protection in the 1990s? The answer will be that no such comments exist. They are responsible for representing the interests of their state, aren't they?
7) The Clinton administration. Has anybody done a Lexis search for how many times Bill Clinton called attention to the Louisiana levees in the 1990s? Again, the answer will be none. But that question is the important one because a public works project of the size necessary to substantially improve the levees or protect New Orleans would have had to have started back then.
8) The Bush administration. There will probably be some evidence sometime that the federal government response wasn't perfect. But I haven't seen it yet.
You get the picture.
First, no one is responsible for the hurricane itself. Insurance policies often contain "acts of God" clauses for a reason -- because there are things beyond control of any human agency. Things happen. We live in an imperfect world. It's the weather. Etc. Anyone who doesn't understand this is an infant and should not be listened to.
Second, no one is responsible for the New Orleans levees breaching. I'm sorry, but saying that this event was foreseen by scientists and engineers is not good enough. Scientists and engineers can foresee a lot of things that might have some probability of occurring that would cause us harm if they occur. But that doesn't mean that in a world of scarce resources -- I'm using the term in the sense it's used by economists -- that anyone is at fault for deciding that resources are better spent on things other than preparing for a disaster that may never happen. A California earthquake could happen -- does that mean that we should invest scarce resources to rebuild every building in California so that it can withstand even the strongest earthquake? A comet could strike the Earth -- does that mean that we should invest trillions of dollars in space-based super weapons that could shoot it out of the sky? We could have saved every house in New Orleans if we'd spent hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild them all on steel-reinforced concrete stilts 30 feet above the ground. But reasonable people decided that wasn't a good use of resources. Indeed, the notion is so absurd that no reasonable person ever proposed it. So quit talking about how we should have spent billions to create a Cat 5 hurricane-resistant levee.
Third, the devastation, while difficult for the country and tragic for many individual families and communities, is not that bad. The death toll appears to be much lower than the doomsayers in the media were predicting, although with fairness they were getting their information from doomsayers in government, largely from the New Orleans city government. The property damage, while significant, is, frankly, a drop in the bucket -- pardon the pun -- of the incredible American economic engine. We have an $11-12 trillion economy this year and every year. We can absorb a one-time hit of $100-200 billion without a whole lot of trouble.
Fourth, logistics are not without costs. People apparently expect the federal government to have in place what amounts to a permanent fountain of goods and a permanent army of relief workers ready to descend instantaneously and almost in a frictionless manner on any disaster of any size. Who pays this supposed army of relief workers? Who pays to build all these storage facilities all over the country? Who pays for all these goods that we believe should be ready at a moment's notice? Who pays indeed. Again, one of the reasons why disaster relief is not frictionless is because we have better uses for our resources than simply having trained people and mountains of goods sitting around waiting for a disaster to strike.
So the question is more precisely phrased: "Who is responsible for any additional deaths or unnecessary misery that may have occurred because the reaction to the hurricane or the flooding wasn't as quick or as competent as it should have been given the resources available?"
Here are my quick thoughts, and you'll note there is a principled structure to this outline:
1) Fathers of the children of New Orleans. Approximately 60% of the births in New Orleans are to unwed mothers. A disproportionate share of the people who didn't make it out of New Orleans were unwed mothers and their small children. Where were their fathers? If I leave my kid unattended at the playground for five minutes the people I know start thinking I'm a bad dad. Why the double standard? You know why. Well, I won't play. If you let your kid suffer in a hurricane you are a rat bastard, period. The smallest platoons are the families. A sergeant (dad) who deserts his platoon is a coward and a deserter, period. I don't care if you're poor, I don't care if you're black, white, yellow, green, or purple. Dads don't leave their kids in a storm, period.
2) Children of the elderly of New Orleans. Another disproportionate share of the people who apparently didn't make it out of New Orleans were the elderly and infirm in hospitals and old folks' homes. Where were their children? Why do we abandon our elderly like this? This is, of course, a bigger question than Katrina, but I am not willing to absolve real children of real parents and blame bureaucrats instead. If you let your Momma die of neglect, the nurses and the doctors and the other workers at the hospital and home are simply the agents of that neglect; you are the principal, and the negligence should be imputed to you.
The upshot of (1) and (2) is obvious -- the strongest and best protector of people is the family. There is no substitute.
3) Neighbors. Neighbors don't let their friends and neighbors drown or starve or die of thirst. Neighbors don't prey on their neighbors. The strong must help the weak.
4) Local government. Mayor Nagin screwed the pooch and appears to be content to keep on screwin'. Enough said. This fellow was a disgrace -- the hundreds of City school buses and municipal buses sitting unused and waterlogged throughout the city are all you need to know.
If he was a white Republican and not a black Democrat he would have already been tarred and feathered.
5) State government. Ditto for Katherine Blanco. What an empty suit she is! I wouldn't let her run a Parish fundraiser.
Obviously, (4) and (5) also point to the long history of corruption and incompetence in New Orleans and Louisiana.
6) Senators from Louisiana. Has anybody done a Lexis search on how many times Mary Landrieu or John Breaux are on the record asking for massive new government spending on New Orleans levees and Louisiana flood control and hurricane protection in the 1990s? The answer will be that no such comments exist. They are responsible for representing the interests of their state, aren't they?
7) The Clinton administration. Has anybody done a Lexis search for how many times Bill Clinton called attention to the Louisiana levees in the 1990s? Again, the answer will be none. But that question is the important one because a public works project of the size necessary to substantially improve the levees or protect New Orleans would have had to have started back then.
8) The Bush administration. There will probably be some evidence sometime that the federal government response wasn't perfect. But I haven't seen it yet.
You get the picture.
posted by PDB at 1:06 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home