Author |
Message |
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:47 am
If you are ever down here Sunshyne, I will be more than happy to take you on an 8-hour tour without ever going into the Lower 9th Ward (which is only one small section of the New Orleans area.) ??? why are you addressing this to me? I never said anything about who had what destroyed. I think you may have read my cutnpaste and thought I said the original. IF I ever do go to New Orleans though, I would love a general tour. I have way too much empathy to want to see the destruction though. I always imagine how I would feel if it was my family involved....and it would be too upsetting. I dont like even seeing pictures.
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:50 am
OH I see now. I am sure that there were low income white/ mixed race who lost their places and had no insurance. It just shows his narrow mindset to suggest that only black people lost out. This statement couldn't be further from the truth. OH I see what you mean however more middle class, upper middle class and upper income families lost their homes in Katrina NEVER had any house insurance?? I guess I didnt understand what the discussion was. I thought we were talking specifically about Abassi and his assertions that Black people were the ones who suffered. *** I must say though, the Canadian News covered katrina quite widely. I found it horribly upsetting when viewing the small towns and farms completely flooded. The stress on people must have been terrible. I still can see the live News helicopters showing herds of cows barely able to hold their heads above the waterline. and later, starving Dogs and cats being rescued after being abandoned. I feel The emotional damage must be deeper and just as prevalent as the financial damage in the area affected by Katrina.
|
Jodied75
Member
08-26-2004
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 7:51 am
I think this was a terrible swap. The issues of racism and Katrina are very serious, and bringing the God Warrior into ANY situation involves a whole new level of tackiness. Marg was obviously very popular, getting her own personal bobblehead and even making it on Leno, but she is a total joke. I was thinking maybe I could take her a little more seriously, until she did all the retching over the toilet upon hearing about Abasi's bodily emanations. I would have liked to see Abasi's family get a wife with an interracial family, and Marg's family an uptight, black-business-suited, no-nonsense, New Yorker type. And I agree with the person who said reverse racism is just as bad. I don't think extremism in a cause helps in any case.
|
Puzzled
Member
08-27-2001
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 9:38 am
LOL, Cricket, you're right. It's hard to imagine those women hangin' with God Warrior. They sure do seem to like being on TV, though.
|
Chiliwilli
Member
09-04-2006
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:21 am
It's a pretty sad reflection on the watching audience that God Warrior was that popular, IMO. At least she did watch herself, was upset at what she saw of herself and has taken some of it to heart. I saw a very changed person this time.
|
Beachcomber
Member
08-26-2003
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:24 am
Some have questioned how people can not have homeowner's insurance. The reason those affected aren't able to start over with insurance payoffs is the fact that the majority of homeowners had regular insurance and not Flood insurance so the companies would not cover the damage since it was attributed to flood. I know we pay for a separate flood insurance policy for our place at the beach on top of the regular homeowner's insurance policy. Recently the newspaper had an article where a couple sued Nationwide Insurance and won because they claimed their home was wiped out due to tornadoes that preceded the hurricane and not because of flooding. Hopefully this case will help others receive insurance payouts. I can't imagine trying to recover and start over with no insurance proceeds, especially after paying premiums for eons to Nationwide.
|
Chiliwilli
Member
09-04-2006
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:37 am
I can't imagine that either, Beachcomber. That's why I couldn't figure out why you would own a home and not have it insured. And, IMO, if you live in NO where the levees are not safe why wouldn't you have flood insurance?
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:55 am
(((sigh)))
|
Wargod
Moderator
07-16-2001
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 11:22 am
If it's like earthquake insurance it's probably too danged expensive. We live in So Cal, not too far away from the San Andreas fault and we've been waiting for "the Big One" for years. We don't have earthquake insurance because if our house was destroyed in an earthquake, we wouldn't get paid anywhere near enough money to rebuild our mid 1950's house.
|
Beachcomber
Member
08-26-2003
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 11:23 am
Flood insurance is very expensive. If you have a mortgage on your house, banks will check to see if you are in a flood zone based on the 100 year flood maps, and if you are then the bank requires you to have a flood insurance policy before you can get a mortgage. However, if you had paid off your home and you had never had flooding, would you continue to pay the expensive premiums? I don't think that many would. Also (and Lexie correct me if I am wrong), I don't think that many people thought the levees were unsafe. They had held in hurricanes before. I bet that everyone affected will be required to have flood insurance going forward and that other insurance companies will require it before they will issue a regular homeowner's policy. A sad lesson to learn the hard (and unpredictable) way.
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:18 pm
You've got it Beach. Those levees held up for the past 40 years. Flood insurance is a government program, therefore, anyone can get it and no one will be refused (unlike many insurance companies which quit writing homeowner's insurance on the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Andrew). However, your premiums are based on your "flood elevation." I live in an "AE" flood elevation zone; therefore, even though I live in a "flood zone"; I am unlikely to have flooding as my house has made it through Betsy, Camille, all the other baby hurricanes, and now Katrina, without flooding; however, my mortgage company requires it. The homes in Lakeview/Lakeview South, etc. were not in a flood zone and were not required to have flood insurance. (Plus, many elderly people lived in homes that were paid off). Those homes were considered so high up that there was no chance of "rising water" due to a hurricane. Now, unfortunately, the few that did have flood insurance may have had only $250,000 worth of flood insurance and the homes are worth anywhere between $500,000 to well over $1 million dollars. We didn't know until after Katrina about a dirty little secret called "excess" flood insurance which will cover damage over $250,000. The premiums are extremely expensive (over $6,000 a year); however, many people who had flood insurance and lost their homes would have had excess insurance had they known about it. Unfortunately, out of the 5,000 or more homes in Lakeview, I would be very surprised if 10% had flood insurance. To be honest, I blame both the mortgage companies and the homeowners insurance companies for not requiring these homeowners to obtain flood insurance regardless of how high their elevation was. But, the flooding occurred as a result of man-made errors and not an Act of God (with the exception of St. Bernard and Plaquemines Parishes in this area which suffered the worst flooding because of both the levees and the Act of God). St. Bernard Parish was under 15-30 feet of water (depending where you were in the Parish) because they had water come in from the Industrial Canal on the west side and storm surge from the MRGO (Mississippi River Gulf Outlet) on the east side. We're talking 2-story homes that were completely submerged. Fortunately, most of these residents had flood insurance; however, getting your flood insurance to pay you off is another story and out of 45,000 residents, less than a couple of thousand have returned. FYI... my flood insurance went up 40% after Katrina (and I didn't suffer any flooding) and my homeowner's went up 40% and I got screwed on the settlement (Thanks State Farm )!!
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:59 pm
This is what happens when I edit and edit and edit a post at work... my above statement about St. Bernard Parish should read "out of 45,000 residents, maybe 10,000 have returned; however, thousands of homes have been demolished because many of the owners walked away from them."
|
Frogichik
Member
06-11-2002
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 1:35 pm
"I have no sympathy for people who own homes without insurance. I know. I'm mean. If you own a home that is financed, insurance is required by the banks. Therefore, the only way I know to not have insurance on your home is to have it already paid for. You have no mortgage but can't pay insurance? Right. I'm so tired of the people who want something for nothing or think the world owes them." Chilliwilli, my aunt is 72 years old living on a fixed income of about $10k-$11k a year. Taxes on her paid off house are about $1,700.00 and after the hurricanes her insurance has gone up to $3k a year. So right out of the gate almost half her income is going to taxes and insurance. Now start adding up food, gas, utilities, etc. I have a little more empathy to see why someone with a limited income may be forced to forgo house insurance.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 1:41 pm
I lived in Key West for a couple of years. I assumed the risk of losing everything I had while we lived there. If I had lost everything (we came close with Hurricane Georges), then I would have only myself to blame. If people want to live near the coast, then they should assume the risk of losing everything and not having good old Uncle Sam come in and bail them out. Anyway, all in all, the trading spouses show was pretty good if it has given us fodder for discussion.
|
Mocha
Member
08-12-2001
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 2:21 pm
You're assuming these people had a choice of living by the coast. It's probably been where they've lived for generations and is all they know. It boggles my mind the attitude taken in these posts.
|
Beachcomber
Member
08-26-2003
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 2:22 pm
I have a house at the NC coast and pay a pretty penny for flood insurance and for homeowner's insurance. I don't expect the government to bail me out (even though I pay a tremendous amount of taxes), that is what the insurance policies are for in an ideal world. Don't blame the banks (they are my livelihood and I have to defend them on this), the federal government has the Flood Disaster Protection Act that regulates how mortgages will be handled for homes in the flood zones and this is a major hot button for the federal bank examiners lately. The banks have nothing to do with the borrower's purchase of flood insurance, the borrower is only expected to present the Flood Insurance Policy with the bank named as mortgagee before the loan can be made (per govt regs). The process where the borrower purchases the policy needs to be improved so that the government better informs them of what policy levels are available for purchase. Back OT, will part 2 be this Friday?
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 2:55 pm
Mocha, with all due respect: Why should it matter whether someone has lived there for one year or 50 make a difference. As an attorney, I tend to see it as an "assumption of the risk". If an individual wants to live in tornado country, then so be it. Just don't go whining to the Federal Government when the big, bad wolf blows the house down. My rant assumes that the people living in these natural-disaster-prone areas are rational human beings who can think about their options and decide accordingly. Why should poverty be an excuse? Heck back in my college days, I moved to another city across the country with only $150 to my name. If I can make it on that, why can't someone else? Back on topic: Yes, the second part is supposed to air this Friday. 
|
Mocha
Member
08-12-2001
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 3:00 pm
Oh an attorney, that explains it all. Just because you could make it on that doesn't mean everyone can. I'd like to move to a different state but have to wait until I can get selected for a job which after 4yrs hasn't happened yet. I can't just pack up and go with 2 children, 2 dogs, and ailing family members that I live near who need/will need my help. So I feel the feds should help out. That's what they're there for.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 3:48 pm
Yes, Mocha, it does. It means that I am not someone waiting for the Feds to come bail me out. I believe in taking care of my needs on my own. I don't rely on Tom, Dick and Harry...or for that matter, the US Government to care of me when I've lost everything because I CHOSE to live in an area that is prone to natural disasters. In my book it is called "tough luck" and a "personal problem". I would expect nothing more than this for myself.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 4:09 pm
People are free to expect for themselves whatever they want. However, the reality of many low income families says it's just not as easy for some as for others. Most of those who drowned in Katrina were 60 plus years old. As I recall, it was about 70% or more of the deaths. It was just not so easy for our elderly to pick up and get out. Many of those who didn't have insurance were at or below poverty level. It is simply not so easy to rise above that, especially when you're over 60 and can't get a job, or can't work because of your physical disabilities. Someone once said, a country is judged by how well it treats its most vulnerable populations -its poor, its elderly and its children. Personally I think the US fails miserably on all three accounts.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 4:36 pm
Karuuna, I agree with your viewpoint, with respect to the elderly.
|
Puzzled
Member
08-27-2001
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 4:40 pm
How the hell does someone with little or no or a very bad education manage to move to another city and get a higher paying job--especially if they have dependents? If they stay where they are, they are probably living with family and friends to make ends meet. In another city, they'd be sleeping on a park bench. It's really easy to say everyone has a choice, but some people's choices are much more limited than other's.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 4:46 pm
But isn't that just an "excuse"? From personal experience: I grew up in a rat and cockroach infested apartment building. There were eight of us crammed in a one-bedroom apartment. Our neighbor was a busy Los Angeles freeway. My parents worked their butts-off to get us a better life. They did this with a first grade education and without speaking English. If they can do it, others can too. Anyway, I am back at work tomorrow, so I will not devote time to TVclubhouse since all I am doing is just ranting. I must sound like Rush Limbaugh! <<gross>> Sorry!
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 4:54 pm
Rehtse, it's great that you were able to do that, and you have every right to be proud. But you make a fundamental attribution error when you assume or insist that everyone else is or should be like you. Some folks simply don't have the mental resources or educational opportunities, or even the love of a decent family to teach them the skills and values you have. It's not reasonable to expect others who didn't have the very basics in life to react the way you did. In fact, it's not really reasonable to expect folks who had as much as you did to behave the way you did. Some people simply require more support to get through life. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just realistic.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Monday, January 22, 2007 - 5:24 pm
But then, isn't that just "life"? Survival of the fittest and all that? (I know, we are all human, we have (should have) a soul and compassion, bla bla bla, but to what extent? To the extent where we are constantly being called in to help people who cannot or will not take care of themselves?
|
|
|
|