Re: Anybody see a problem with this?

If you've ever drained a stopped up sink or bathtub, or toilet, you know that what's left is a film of scum where that water was standing.

Given that the floodwater in New Orleans is at least as disgusting as anything that you might try to drain from a stopped up toilet, I would hesitate to say that the receding water is exposing "fresh" territory.

That said, if people have held out this long in their own homes, then it's just flat wrong to force them out. Period. They are real Americans, who stood by their land and home through hell and high water (and in their case "hell and high water" was more than an oft-used saying - it was reality).

If even a quarter of the effort spent forcing New Orlinians out of their houses were spent bringing them necessities - like food and drinkable water - a real difference would be made.

I'm not talking about *who* would take care of them, I'm talking about *how* they would be taken care of, financially. I'd imagine that a lot of these people don't have a pot to piss in, much less health insurance.

It's not, if it's *your* $100k. But, again, a lot of the people that are refusing to leave will be spending *my* money. Don't *I* have a right to say where it's spent?

Having worked in the field of emergency medicine and organ transplantation, for more than 25 years, I've seen plenty of non-helmeted riders present to the ER with life-threatening head injuries. And, even if some of these riders had private insurance, eventually Medicare/Medical/Medisomething would be called upon to pay bills. For those without private insurance, M/M/M would pay from the get-go.

How am I asking "other people to do my bidding?" Did you just have a past-acid moment?

I don't have any idea what these people are feeling. I can only imagine. They're being told to leave everything behind, with the promise that "We'll take care of you." Based on how the government's taken care of them, up until now, I wouldn't believe a word of it.

But, I'd rather force them to leave, now, with their health and whatever belongings they can take, than later, in some type of medical transport vehicle. Which brings up another question... Isn't it better, for everyone, to try and find a place for these people in some type of housing unit than a hospital?

Notan

Asked and answered.

Another case of twisted words, ala Don.

You want names? Don't be an asshole.

I knew you'd eventually get to another "This government sucks" lecture.

Whenever the subject turns serious, it's all you ever seem to do.

You're like an old English teacher I had, as a kid. She'd ask us to read a book and write a paragraph about what *we* thought it said. Then, she'd tell some people they were wrong. You do the same thing. You post bits and pieces of a coherent thought, and ask people what they think. But, if it's not what you were thinking, they're wrong.

People like you bother me. Not that you have strong opinions about many subjects... I can respect that. It's the fact that you don't even *consider* the possibility that people with opposing viewpoints might be right.

Goodnight, Don.

Notan

The people who take the "taxpayers"'s money do the "asking." It falls back to "paying your fair share for services rendered."

Of course, if somebody sends you something in the mail you didn't order, you don't have to pay. You didn't actually _ask_ for it. But if it's a government "service" forced on you, then you asked for it.