Disgusting Gated Community Yuppie Scum

This is housing for women and children who have no home, it's NOT right inside their stupid gated community but seperated by a wall. Unf*cking believable, stupid selfish bastards. And Mayor Nagin? That idot should be ridden out of NO on a rail for the good he's done that city.




edited title of post after reading more about situation

Its a common theme. People say they want more homeless shelters, they want more domestic violence shelters, they want more social services.... UNTIL you try to put one up in their neighborhoods. Then all of a sudden it's about property values and "not in my backyard".

<- Blown away

I'd evict the fuckwits who complained, and house the homeless in their homes.

The upcomming election, no matter which way it goes, is sure to be telling and interesting.

About a year ago in my city a local domestic violence shelter petitioned to open a new house. They use the houses to give women and childred escaping from abusive partners a temporary place to stay where their partners can't find them. The locations of the houses are carefully kept a secret with only the escaping women and counselors being aware of them. But because they are an organization they still have to get clearance from residents and the city to open one. Every house they tried to buy they were rejected by the local residents... most of them claiming they would be afraid of having to deal with noise or criminal elements.

Keep in mind the locations of these safe houses are kept a secret so in fact they create no additional crime or domestic disputes in any of the neighborhoods in which they are located... but people simply wouldn't accept this. They were turned down by every neighborhood they tried to move into until finally they ended up buying a house on the outskirts of town surrounded by farmland, making it very difficult for some of these women with no transportation to be able to improve their situation.

I am sure that your opinion is based on an intimate knowledge of the political-geography of the Greater New Orleans area, right? You know where the Lakewood subdivision is, what the "gates" actually enclose, whether they are actually barriers to entry for living space or merely a means of directing traffic away from streets where children often play in the streets... You are familiar with that and much more here, right?

Guess what? I've lived within five blocks of there. I have relatives who live there now. I still live in the general area and currently house some who no longer have homes, who have been promised as yet undelivered FEMA trailers for that matter.

However, since YOU don't live there and I am fairly certain that, like most people not down here in the Gulf Coast regions affected by the hurricanes, you aren't actively (on a daily basis) pressing for Congress and the Adminsitration to deliver what's been directed and promised, I feel that your outrage and disgust is pretty valueless.

We're getting lots of criticism for "our" politics and recovery down here... lots of peanut gallery wisdom from outsiders like you who aren't dealing with this on a daily basis. Like peanut butter, some of it sticks in my craw - your "outrage" and opinion on this matter won't make a bit of difference.

But I'll tell you what. Why don't you let me park 40 or 50 trailers on your streets, without tearing up the sewers so that waste can be properly disposed of... wait, what should be done about that waste? Oh, you'll let me tear your street up to increase the waste disposal capacity? Great. Are you also willing to put up with the aggravation while we increase the electrical system capacity in that area -- oh wait.. what about the fallout after the trailers leave and now your area is accused of being favored when other (recovered) areas are built with less capacity? You're willing to deal with the fallout on a personal basis? On a political basis?

FWIW, Nagin's i na no win situation. His mouth has overloaded his ass multiple times perhaps.. but I challenge you or anyone else to have done better given the dearth of resources he has been faced with. My maternal great-grandmother said she felt that her area of town (9th Ward) was more devasted and less supported infrastructure wise than was the case in Stuttgart, where she is from, immediately after WW2. Housing and the NIMBY principle was just as much in effect then also.

Sorry. I'm afraid you are outraged about something that you haven't THE RIGHT to be outraged about. It simply is none of your business.

Your right - although you would think people would be a little more charitable after the hurricanes?

In our neighborhood a lot of people had family that had to move out of their places and move in with them, so suddenly a lot of RV's appeared and lots of cars were parked all over the place. So what - no one complained. It's what we have to do to take care of people. We even had a friend stay with us a few weeks because her apartment building was condemmed. In Ft Laud alone over 150,000 people were left homeless.

Fortunately I don't live in a gated community, so no one had to ask permission either.

Slowly people are beginning to find places to live again and our neighborhood is beginning to look a little more normal - though there are still lots of blue roofs (tarps) in the city. It's not a permanent situation.

I just can't believe how nasty these people are.

.

Your right - I don't live there - don't know the politics of the area.

With regard to parking 40 or 50 trailers in my neighborhood however, FEMA was supposed to bring 25 to our park. We are still waiting. Our nearby street has been dug up to accomodate the disposal issue, FP&L should be able to handle the power issue but people are STILL living in shelters because FEMA has not delivered the trailers.

Oddly, no one in my neighborhood sent around a petition complaining - ok - so Lee (the usual trouble maker) tried, but everyone told him to F off and that ended it.

So while I don't know the politics there, either do you know them here.

I still think the actions of the people in that gated community were awful.

.

Yeah.. so? The title of this thread is a public slam on my area. Your subsequent response suggests that you and those who live where you live area somehow "better" because you report having handled something you think is similar in a "more humane" way.

Tell you what... you stay where you are. Keep your politics and view there. Leave my area alone and please don't inflict your admittedly uninformed opinion about my relatives, area, local politics, etc. on these forums. From your previous posts, you certainly have enough assaulting your psyche to feel better by ignoring/not commenting on what's happening in my neck of the woods.

Were it not a local hot button issue that I am faced with on a daily basis, I might have ignored the ignorance of your post. I would prefer that you focus your comments elsewhere since they certainly don't accomplish anything positive as they smack of self-righteous arrogance.

Personally I think FEMA should offer to relocate people affected by the hurricane to a much safer area. If they want to rebuild in a hurricane prone area that happens to be under sea level - let their insurance (and nothing but) provide help for them. STOP USING MY TAX MONEY TO FUND IDIOCY.

Uh huh.
[mere sarcasm on]So you do realize, I know, that New Orleans is under sea level as a result of Federal Corps of Engineering actions... right? You do realize that FEMA dollars are not mandated national flood insurance, right? That if you are in a Federally designated flood plain, flood insurance is mandatory, right? Yet it still doesn't cover, in many cases, half the costs inflicted by the hurricanes, flooding, both. You know all that, right?[mere sarcasm off]

[massive sarcasm on]And of course you're familiar with all the positive insurance settlements - the ones where AllState and all the other big companies have simply walked in, seen the devastation and settled up without challenging whether that waterline at the 12 foot level on the wall was the cause of the loss of your possessions or whether the roof that was blown off was the cause. ..Wait. So, you don't back the Federal response after Andrew in Florida either? Oh, sorry. You do because that was not under sea level? I see. ... And, no one should be assisted if they live in tornado alley either, right?[/massive sarcasm off]

I tell you what... define similar IDIOCY for me when it happens to you, your relatives, the area you live in.

Actually, no I don't. If you are in an area prone to hurricanes, etc, you should be offered the FEMA assistance to relocate. You choose not to, its your decision and the taxpayers shouldn't be held responsible for your decision.

This also stops th e excuse that is popular: I can't afford to relocate.

Oh wait..FEMA is helping you move. Damn.

Stay and pay your own way.

Let's see, the prone to hurricanes region extends from Maine to Texas if memory serves me right. That is, hurricanes have struck all along the Eastern seaboard. Oh.. you're going to define "prone" numerically now? Well, theoretically, how are you going to justify saying an area hit by a few Cat 1s over a hundred years period is actually "prone" as opposed to an area that has been hit by 6 in the last decade?

So, Floridians should be paid to move? No? Because they aren't below sea level? That's some kind of twisted logic.

The Carolinas? Oh.. you're not going to support people inhabiting that either?

Hmm.. did you support paying for the post-9/11 recovery in NYC? You did? Wow. How do you justify that?

I'm not arguing anyone is entitled to anything except that which has been offered and "guaranteed" by past and present law. FEMA relocation expenses are not law... I personally really wouldn't support that as there are too many variables (how far away can you relocate, how much can I spend to relcoate and be compensated, will compensation cover all expenses, the same amount for a single person as for a family of 12?).

I'm astounded, literally astounded that people take this attitude you express. Part of that, probably most of it, stems from a belief that I am not sure that people making such statements as you have haven't quite grasped the entirety of the problem when proposing their "solutions". I know I don't have a complete grasp on all the problems... but I also know in my heart that there's no reasonable (to me) simple solution here.

Actually, no, I didn't.

How about you consider this. A good portion of my taxes go to social security. Which, by all current estimates, will be drained by the time I can receive it.

I shouldn't have to pay for it if it can't be guaranteed to actually -last 30 years as a federal program-

We had a few gated communities that kept people from moving their families in after Katrina & Wilma. I think they are just as shitty.

It is a public slam on what the people in that community did - though not self-righteous or arrogant, just damn angry at the attitude in general no matter if it was in NO or in S. Florida.

.

Aside-I had problems with the Federal dollars to NYC also to an extent, fwiw. But, I reconsidered it --- before the hurricanes hit.

Anyway, Social Seurity... hot topic analogy. I'm nearing entitlement age myself. I can see the applicability and the concerns. Yet, age and earning power related to age is predictable as opposed to weather related events and damage (to an extent at least).

It is pretty widely accepted that one of most governments' roles is to take a larger view in the man vs Nature battle when man loses. For instance, the Dutch built huge dikes to create and protect land from flooding and storms.

In this case, I ask again, where do you draw the line? Galveston was hit 100 years ago. Should people not be allowed/encouraged to live there? How far inland do you go with such "restrictions"? Are you arguing that none of the barrier islands should be inhabited? If not, then which ones can you justify? Why those and not others?

Are you arguing that Florida should not get any funds EVER due to hurricane damage? (That state has the worst record in American history for sustaining hurricane damage.) If so, I guess the discussion's ended right there because I can't see any logic to justify that conclusion.

Hum....

Sounds like the people of the Gated community suffer from NIMBY disease.

Very interesting.

I think if you look at your initial post, you slammed the mayor and more. You also expresed more than mere outrage and disgust by calling for him to be ridden out of NO on a rail - doing so calls for political action at a time when a very hotly contested election process you have no vested interest in is going on. Finally, you showed you don't really know what good he's done since the hurricane when you say "for the good he's done that city".

You also conveniently(?) ignore the men who might be living in the trailers should they have been placed there... Why limit the outrage to "women and children" - especialy when you don't have knowledge of who the intended residents were? I sense an unspoken agenda here.

So, the subsequent attempt at explanation/left-handed apology didn't reach any measure of being non-negative about where I live and what we are going through.

Consequently I will repeat myself. Please do those of us who live here and also frequent these forums a favor and keep your opinion on this matter , which seems based on ignorance of the facts and a propensity for personal activism, out of the forums. Talk about anything else you want... this one is too close to home for me not to respond to when faced with such ******.

Because he is allowing the people in the gated community to get by with blocking FEMA from putting the housing up and not standing up for them and I find that ugly, so I stand by my opinion of Mr. Nagin even though I don't live in NO.



Umm - maybe because the article specifially states women and children?



No apologies here - I stand by my statement, the people in that gated community are acting like self centered yuppie asshats.

.

My opinion goes where I go

I just hope they get those trailer homes erected somewhere before hurricane season 2006 hits.

As someone who lives here and has to face the upcoming season and knowing a fair number who ARE in trailers or other temporary housing, my "feel" for those in and offered the trailers is that having them during/before the season hits and riding out the season IN them if one hits nearby are two completely different things. In a way, having them here during the hurricane season will only exacerbate an already bad problem. They are not rated to withstand wind damage approaching that which can be expected from Cat 2 storms much less anything worse and I wouldn't want to ride out even a Cat 1 storm in one, personally.

The closest thing I have to a temporary "solution" has been proposed AND rejected by others due to factional infighting and certain legal, historical and social considerations. I'd employ military engineers and civilian contractors under HUD direction to build apartment complexes on previously existing but now condemned housing project spaces.. That's been rejected due to charges of "you're perpetuating slums/projects" and "subsidizing a perpetual underclass by not encouraging residents to pull themselves up by their bootstraps - as I did//wait, you'll 'resettle' people fromthe projects - what about compensating me for my house I paid for" - as well as for other reasons. . It's freaking complicated. Funny thing is, few people seem to have similar arguments when Seabees build things in foreign countries as a means of diplomacy. It seems we can do for others but not for outselves.

Nimby and "gated community yuppie scum" are far from the "only" problem here. They're drops in a bucket whose size is limited only by the differences between each and every one of us alive today.

Oh, look, I missed that little codicil in the Bill of Rights ..... "freedom of speech as long as it's happening near you and you're knowledgeable about the topic." I would prefer you focused your efforts towards something other than telling people not to express their opinions. Everyone has the RIGHT to be outraged about whatever they care to be, whether they know anything about it or not.


And how do you know that? Maybe they have a friend or relative in New Orleans, or just care about the city. Who are you to determine who should care about one issue or another? That's really incredibly arrogant.


Well now you know how I feel when I hear men rant on about abortion. But I don't tell them to shut up just because they don't have a womb. Instead, I argue their points or - hey - ignore the thread! Are you somehow being forced to read this thread? If you don't want to hear their opinions, why don't you - you know - not read it?


Guess what? NO federal program can be GUARANTEED to last any amount of time, what with elections and all. Funny how that works.

Okay. You did miss it, deliberatley or otherwise. I expressed my frustration at what's happening around me being negatively focused on by someone who has a history of histrionic rants about rights, wrongs and indignities in these forums. You choose to focus on that expression of frustration and then want to play rhetorical games? Cool.

But you should get your facts straight first. The poster said she/he (I don't really know... no insult intended) doesn't live in the area. Locals have a say in local politics... not people who don't live there. That's a basic premise of American law. Deal with it.

Finally, your method of dealing with things is superior to mine? Who says so? You? Waaah.

As you said, you didn't like what I said/wrote, why didn't you just move on?