How come there's no problem evacuating 500,000 Californians from their homes?

Question

Yet in New Orleans, total break down of society.

Answer 1

The government really only cares about rich, white constituents.

(Notice I wrote "government" not Republicans or Democrats. They are equally guilty in my eyes.)

Answer 2

It's the idea of 'Nanny Government' that has lately become so prevalent. They rightly feel that they have a duty to protect the citizen from danger, and up to tht point, I agree. They also feel that that duty goes beyond fair warning including an "If you ignore this, you're on your own clause". They feel that since they can't reasonably expect to protect those who would choose to remain in the danger area, they must deprive them of that choice. In some quarters, they would even be criticized for NOT doing so. However well meant, I feel that this goes beyond the proper powers of a Government. I would suggest that if the people are required to take responsibility for their actions and not protected from the consequences of stupidity, it will eventually improve the entire country. If they're treated as irresponsible children, that's what they remain. Make no mistake though. Not ordering that evacuation would cost lives. I hold with C. Morton who said: "The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where a certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the'lions`.

Answer 3

I am so sick of the insulting LIES that have been posted here! We are not all rich in San Diego. I may be white but we live paycheck to paycheck like most people do.

You do realize that 4 of the people that died were migrant workers. I don't think they were rich. One man that lost his home an everything he owned lived in a trailer park, and he's Hispanic. The whole trailer park was destroyed.

One HUGE difference is when people were told to evacuate, THEY EVACUATED! The residents in New Orleans refused to leave even though they were told a large storm was on its way and might hit them.

We took care of each other. Thousands of volunteers helped. The local leaders didn't sit on their hands waiting for the feds.

Another issue is the fact that people in San Diego were told that looters would be prosecuted harshly. No looters!

Blanco told people that looters would not be prosecuted. Looters would rob stores in front of TV cameras!

People, if you don't know the San Diego area and the affected sections, with all due respect - SHUT UP! You sound like idiots!

Answer 4

I believe there are several reasons for the difference in how these two events compare.
First off, in NOLA, the entire area was devastated, and people who didn't or couldn't leave were unable to receive assistance from people who were in the near vicinity because everybody in the near areas were struggling as well. In San Diego, there are many areas that are not yet effected, so the people are able to help those who need it.
Also, The freeway system in San Diego is set up more efficiently to move massive amounts of people on a daily basis, even if certain routes are unusable. In NOLA, due to the nature of the geography, there were a lot less ways to access the city.
the other difference is that the fires in California, while unpredicable, are not as quickly encompassing the city as when the levees broke. I lived in California for 7 years through earthquakes, fires, etc, and I know that most people in California are personally prepared for disasters. You would be hard pressed to find a household that didn't have a plan for whatever nature brings. Important documents, valuables, etc, are usually placed in an area where they can be gotten to quickly in case of an earthquake (the usual disaster in Cal) or Fire ( not quite as commonly as large as the present fires, but still a constant threat)
Please don't think that it has anything to do with race or money. If your house is destroyed, be it a mansion or a shack, it is still gone, and it is still important to the individuals who are displaced.
My thoughts and prayers are with the people of California, and the people of NOLA as well.

Answer 5

Because the mayors of the cities involved put the transit assets at their disposal to the task of moving people away from the fires. New Orleans has over 400 busses in the NORTA System. Ray Nagin used only three of them to move the families of government and police officials to safety.
And when those evacuees got to the shelters there was food, water and other essentials. That including ten thousand cots from the Department of Defense because the Governor of California asked for Federal assistance early in the life of this disaster.
It's called competence on the part of local and state officials.

Answer 6

Money had EVERYTHING to do with it. My family lived in Bay St. Louis, MS at the time. This is less than 1 hour east of New Orleans. We got whacked hard too.
Here's a big difference. Vehicle ownership. We own a Chevy Lumina, 3000 lbs 6x12' trailer and a Chevy Astrovan at the time. We got out all our family, pets and many belongings out Friday night, 60 hours before it hit. We have money and credit cards. We spent a week in away. First in a Hattiesburg, MS motel Friday and Saturday nights, then with family in Jackson, MS Sunday-Wednesday, because we knew we be homeless for a while. Me and my dad went back then. My mother, sister and kid brother stayed until Saturday.
My dad spent Friday afternoon helping his job load a 7000 lbs 7x16' trailer and GMC Sierra 3500HD pickup with his employer's assets. Forget the truck, the $15,000 trailer excedes the income of many individuals in New Orleans.
Money had EVERYTHING to do with it.
Having money made clean-up and repair easier. We have since moved to Jackson permanently.

Answer 7

Katrina was indeed a world major disaster happening right here in America. As of today this area of the world still looks like a war zone.

I suppose people in SD are more wealthy, more educated, more orderly, less inclined to looting
Also the water has a lot to do with it. If SD experienced a flooding disaster it would look much worse. You would see San Diegans standing on their roof waving help just like in Katrina

Answer 8

Different circumstances. It's easier for people to get away from fires than it is from a flooded city. The people who didn't evacuate New Orleans were trapped by water that was full of sewage, trash, oil, and dead bodies. There really was nowhere for them to go unless they were able to get on the rooftops and wait for someone to rescue them. In the case of the fires, people knew in advance that their homes could be burned down so they got away as quickly as they could. They didn't have flooded streets where the water was often above their heads to deal with so they weren't trapped like the people in New Orleans were.

Answer 9

Not a race thing like many of the tards here are saying, its all about location. All of SoCal isnt engulfed in flames only large sections here and there, so those evacuating have places to go. Means of travel, cars/roads and such are mostly intact unlike Katrina which destroyed most of those. California is also more able to handle fire since it gets major fires every other day (almost) fire personal are close by and were able to respond faster.

Answer 10

Perhaps it's because they are more spread out in California. Plus a lot of them have $$$$ and the people in New Orleans didn't. However, not all the people that are evacuated are actually leaving California. Many of them are staying in shelters. (Sometimes those shelters have to be evac'd too). That happened in New Orleans too, but it took a while for help to arrive there.

Answer 11

you're comparing two different societies. It's like wondering why lions can catch gazelles and elephants can't.

Also, the catastrophe in New Orleans was much larger and more severe.

One other thing. It isn't over yet. In new Orleans, things didn't look too bad for the first few days.