Good Ole Philly...All we have to get anxious over are the media scare tactics over 5 inches of snow...

While the two events are in some small ways comparable, they're really a striking contrast in many ways. The evacuees in SoCal have decent places to go and cities that are still functioning. They're not stranded in a place they can't get out of in unfit and dangerous conditions. Yes, they may lose their homes, but they won't lose their lives and hotels are even discounting their stays if they don't want to be in shelters. It's a completely different scenario. The evacuation has been gradual as the fires moved, not sudden, and they all seem to have had ways out of the threatened areas because those areas are more affluent and not public-transit dependent. The government's lack of response to Katrina was a sin -- don't diminsh it. It was downright criminal. I don't begrudge the people of Malibu and San Diego the better treatment -- everyone deserves that much care; I just wish the country had cared as much about New Orleans. I guess their votes aren't as important. So don't go there. It's wrong to use one tragedy to blame the victims of another.

I was with you until you posted this:

I don't begrudge the people of Malibu and San Diego the better treatment -- everyone deserves that much care; I just wish the country had cared as much about New Orleans. I guess their votes aren't as important. So don't go there. It's wrong to use one tragedy to blame the victims of another.

I don't think its fair to say that San Diego is going to get better treatment, as by your own words, the two scenarios are not the same. Sad to say I think your post has some undercurrent of racism.

all that aside -

floods and fires are pretty different disasters. you see the fire coming and travel is easy. the fire goes by and doesn't leave much. probably could eat off the ground. a flood comes in and stays, stays stays. everything breaks, sewage comes out, people get sick for years afterward, debris is everywhere.

while fire insurance covers a person to the limit of liability, regardless of the actual loss, flood insurance pays up to the policy limit. if you get the value of your house or policy, its not enough to tear it down, remove it and rebuild a new one of the same value... for so many reasons.

and again - i'm not commenting on either u.s. disaster. just pointing out. perhaps suggesting the two can not be compared as they inevitably will/have.

i am really tired... but this is confusing to me. maybe the color coding is ruining the sweet irony.

What I am saying is that we have two natural disasters, one that affected mostly blacks and one that affected mostly whites. I am predicting that eventually it will be a topic of conversation how differently the government handled both of them, and I think it will be along the lines of the government helps rich whites and not poor blacks.

video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8S2hB9fns0