Comments on: What if Katrina hit San Diego?

By: Internet Guy

Internet Guy — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 02:54:33 +0000

Why compare the Superdome, in the middle of a disaster to Qualcomm, which isn’t?

Compare to the stadium in Houston.

By: Left Coast Vic

Left Coast Vic — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:13:30 +0000

Its funny, the “why do they build there” argument seems to “work” in this situation. It is some how the victims’ fault for building these houses in fire prone hills.

But the same could be said about the NOLA area. Just watch that Spike Lee documentary for a scientifically correct explanation. NOLA should have never been built. Someone got the bright idea of building a city where a city should not have been built. Hurricane Katrina was the the first hurricane to decimate NOLA, and by all scientific accounts it will not be the last. Climatologists have hypothesized that they might need to change the rating scale (currently going up to category 5) to reflect the possibility of stronger hurricanes. Global-warming fueled super hurricanes are undeniably on the horizon.

So we can pretty much ask the same question: Why are the folks in NOLA trying to rebuild there? It will most likely happen again. However, I don’t think one person on these boards would lob e-shots at Katrina victims for trying to rebuild.

I think that regardless of race or class, it is human nature to want to ride for your piece of dirt, no matter where it is.

By: Dante'

Dante' — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:10:15 +0000

The real difference between SoCal and the rest of the country is the “concierge-level” fire protection.
What is that you say? Basically they hired firehoses, private firefighters working for insurance companies to save million dollar homes. Now that’s pimpin’

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-richfire26oct26,1,4295538.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

By: Stephanie D

Stephanie D — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:00:02 +0000

I agree with most of you. Folks just do it different in SoCal. As for the drought the Southeast, Atlanta is gonna run out of water. What will happen then? What if fire broke out in Birmingham or rural South Carolina? I’m sure then we would see more Katrina than Qualcomm.
The major difference that you need to remember is people in Katrina lost their livelihoods, meager property and had little to no insurance. They said it was wind not water damage or water and not wind damage. The people in SoCal were white, rich, and insured. Now let State Farm tell someone they can’t get their money because it was arson! Then we will see the sparks fly!!

By: Bomani

Bomani — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:25:15 +0000

Just in case anyone got confused…my comparison to Katrina was just in the stark difference between the conditions the evacuees in the different cities dealt with. Much of it was brought on by the point KingJ–Qualcomm wasn’t in the middle of the flames, while the Superdome directly affected by the storm.

The main point, though–man, Southern California is its own universe. Who thinks “man, send those folks some masseuses in their time of need?”

By: KingJ

KingJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:15:20 +0000

People people, the biggest difference here is that San Diego, where the stadium is, is not directly affected. It’s not like the fires are putting 10 feet of water in it like Katrina did to New Orleans. Qualcomm Stadium is not being damaged like the roof of the Superdome. Also, you can fuck up a fire with a plane, and planes get fucked by hurricanes. read a book

By: Kirk

Kirk — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:00:44 +0000

Having lived in the area myself, the perception that people are rebuilding their homes over and over again in the middle of an annual S’mores Bake Off is wrong.

Yes, there are fires every year, but typically not in the same places, and not nearly of the geographic scope and intensity that these are. The equivalent would be to ask why anyone stuck around near the Gulf for Katrina, considering that they had this one really nasty storm a few years back that flooded the local Denny’s and knocked out a couple of traffic lights.

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:36:18 +0000

Sure the devastation in SoCal is evident but what I don’t understand is why some of these folks will rebuild in the same place, only to be boohooing next year when the fires happen again. It’s like the brilliant folks who build their palatial homes on the sides of these unstable hills where mudslides happen every year. I can’t offer up any sympathy for these folks.

As for the Katrina references…I am with Kirk on this one.

By: Brew City Drew

Brew City Drew — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:10:39 +0000

I think the comparisons are way off-base. Katrina was a “you or me” situation in an area that was ill-prepared for a disaster like that.(Even though the city was built below sea level)

California has squads and squads of people that are always ready to fight a wildfire, since they get them every year.

It’s much easier to prep for fighting fires on a regular basis than it is to suddenly have to siphon an entire city out of 10-20 feet of water.

And it looks to me like the SoCal-ers are helping each other out, not worrying about protecting what’s theirs. It seems to me like preparation is key.

By: Chrichelle

Chrichelle — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:59:25 +0000

On the real, the folks down there in San Diego aren’t hippies, it’s a strong GOP base in Orange County, thus the first class treatment. Don’t lose a tear for those folks because TRUST that their million dollar properties are fully insured.

Further, we need to keep up the comparisons because the Katrina situation is still in disarray. It may not be an entirely even comparison, with one being fire and the other water, but the difference in response and treatment is startling and plain.

To me, the article Bo linked says it all. They wasn’t giving out massages or pampering to the Katrina folks, they were talking noise at their attempts at foraging food to survive.