Subj : Re: Um...no comment?
To   : richardw
From : Daemon
Date : Tue Sep 06 2005 18:38:00

  Re: Re: Um...no comment?
  By: richardw to Finnigann on Tue Sep 06 2005

 > Have you any idea how long it takes to rebuild a levee?  Let us postulate 
 > that funding was DOUBLED as soon as Bush took office for the first term.
 > You think that would have changed anything today?
 > 
 > Have you any idea the level of crookedness in the NO, and LA governments?  
 > Can you possibly think that more than say 20% of the funds appropriated 
 > would actually get put into the levee?
 > 
 > I have a well educated friend who grew up there... I've heard bad things.

  *shakes head*  You know, it seems the whole opposition to criticism is
boiling down to relatively few things:

1) "This is my opinion.  It is its own justification because either a) I live
and work near the people being criticized or b) I know someone who does."

  I think it's pretty obvious that #1 fails any kind of critical scrutiny
beyond being able to pin-point ego-stroking at 100 yards.  

and

2) "We couldn't have guarded against Nature, so why bother trying?"

  Number 2 is just dumb.  If it's based on saving $$, then what about the $10.5
billion INITIAL lump sum designated to be paid-out instead of the paltry $250
million?

  If it's a matter of not wanting to spend the time and effort to do it, then
get the lazy-ass people responsible for that point of view out of the goddamned
government, because that attitude is costing LIVES.

  If we hold #2 as a given, then we might as well stop trying to design
earthquake-proof structures, early-warning systems, relief-systems, etc.  We
might as well stop trying to decipher the workings of tornadoes, hurricanes,
tsunamis, sink-holes and volcanic activity.  We might as well make it an
openly-stated position of the culture that everyone's on their own; no help is
to be provided for those dumb enough to put themselves in harm's way by living
in an area prone to natural disaster (and then compile the short-list of places
that are immune from such, because as far as I know, there aren't many places
on earth immune to Nature).

  If we're going to assume the position that governmental agencies are
incapable of accomplishing their chartered function, that elected officials
that think, for instance, that "strategery" is a word are better qualified to
make complex scientific and engineering-oriented decisions about things that
aren't directly self-serving to their own political goals, then we're removing
our own interests from government entirely and MIGHT AS WELL just stop voting.

  Save that effort and $$, too.

  Why is it that it NEVER seems to be "the right time" to criticize the
government anymore?  That there's NEVER a reason for holding the government
accountable anymore?  That, no matter what beaurocratic failure has been
documented and in how many ways, there's ALWAYS that voice of, "so?" to be
heard that just continues to make it okay for such to continue unabated?

  Come on, guys.  The facts rather obviate themselves.  Facts, mind you, not
JUST editorial opinion or "because I know better" or "because I know someone
who knows better" or "it costs too much" or "it takes too much time and
effort", etc etc etc.

  This is a seriously ridiculous arguement.


       [daemon]                 
       In the shuffling madness...      



---
 þ Synchronet þ necropolisbbs.darktech.org - Tonawanda, NY

.