Just give us your best guess.
2007-10-27 14:30:15 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You get it Barry. Californians do not want to BE victims and they are not all rich. Rich people stay in their other homes when this happens or hotels. Qualcomm Stadium had quite a large number of people staying there. We will not have to support these people - they'll WORK to get back on their feet.
2007-10-27 14:50:56 · update #1
The One - you are being racist. I'm sure there are blacks who lost their homes too. They just CHOOSE not to be victims...Republican run State...
2007-10-27 15:01:45 · update #2
They won't because MY state knows how to handle disasters. Unlike Blanco and the N.O. mayor who completely screwed up the situation from before the event until years after. Arnie knows what he's doing. It has NOTHING to do with if they are rich or not. And sorry to bust your bubbles but NOT everyone who lost homes were rich.
2007-10-27 15:30:40 · answer #1 · answered by Cinner 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I don't think we have stopped paying for the others, but if we got to better them than the illegal and overstayed visa people.
But the answer is no. California, although has some nutty, liberal people in charge they do have a governor that knows what to do, a great economy, thank's to him and great people who actually give a rat's behind about the people. So no they will grow back better. More honest people also. Take care.
2007-10-28 20:15:26 · answer #2 · answered by R J 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
While a lot more people had to evacuate than in New Orleans, I think for most of them it was temporary, and far fewer people lost their homes. Since presumably most of the victims are white (or at least not poor), they won't have to live in trailers made with formaldehyde, they won't be threatened with guns from going into the "white" neighborhood, and the government won't try to throw them out on the street before they find a permanent place to live.
2007-10-27 23:59:28 · answer #3 · answered by Alan S 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Homes are covered with insurance for fires. Katrina victims had no coverage for floods for the most part (flood insurance is very expensive and has poor coverage with huge deductibles, so even having the insurance may not mean you can afford to rebuild).
Most homes that were burned were nice homes, presumably insured. Most fire victims have cars and money and friends & relatives with homes.
I can't understand your point. If your home is destroyed by a tornado or a fire, should we dump you in the gutter because you dared to live in an area where there are tornados, or because your home was flammable?
2007-10-27 21:42:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
Probably not many at all if any. Like I've said before... Totally different class of people.
2007-10-29 20:02:22 · answer #5 · answered by ks 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If FEMA does their usual fine job, about 1000 out of the 1500 who lost their homes.
2007-10-27 21:38:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Hardly any. Unlike people in Louisiana, people don't sit around moaning and groaning. They help each other up and get to work recovering and restoring things.
2007-10-27 21:47:25 · answer #7 · answered by Barry auh2o 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
NONE.
Thumbs down on the Question. I thoroughly enjoyed the "US" part. Happy Halloween.
2007-10-28 09:01:48 · answer #8 · answered by Mele Kai 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well considering the HUGE demographical difference I doubt many, see you have to be wealthy to live in those hills and we know most of the New Orleans victims were impoverished blacks so not only are you comparing apples to oranges you are once again letting your racism bleed through
Really Lame Pipsqueak
2007-10-27 21:36:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 13⤊ 4⤋
Your inhumanity towards others never ceases to amaze me. You are one of the worst representations of an American on this site. I hope you never find yourself in a position that you need help from others. You are one heartless example of a human being.
2007-10-27 22:00:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋