The locals did nothing to evacuate those that were unable to evacuate themselves. Not only was no transportation provided, there were no pre-planned evacuation destinations that people could head for if they didn't have someplace else. The city may not have been able to get everyone out, but they could have taken a lot of those who were willing to go but lacked the means, as opposed to those who thought they could just ride it out. Here's a picture of over 255 school busses at just one now flooded location:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050901/480/flpc21109012015
Not only were those busses not used, they weren't even moved to higher ground and are now useless. Published reports indicate that the local transit system had about 350 more busses that also went unused.
The local officials simply did what they had done for other lesser storms - put people in a large sturdy structure (the Superdome) that was likely to withstand the storm. That worked, but they didn't have any plan to deal with flooding from the hurricane directly or a levee breach, either of which were quite possible.
Did the Mayor ever go to the Superdome? I don't believe so, and I think that's also true for the Convention Center. Given the geography of New Orleans, any practical plan for a hurricane of this magnitude has to assume that it will take several days for aid to reach the city from the outside. Thus, I find it less than admirable that the locals didn't seem to have a plan beyond calling in the feds.
Let's assume the Mayor did FEMA's job and put out an alert for citizens of New Orleans to come to designated locations to board the busses.
Where was he supposed to send them? Would hotels have accepted 30,000 people gratis? Would gas stations have filled their tanks for free?
There is a reason Hurricane Katrina is a national disaster.
The possibility also exists of nonlinear phenomena such as massive climate shifts - but from what I have heard this is extremely difficult to model accurately.. Still, what we do know is not very reassuring..
Scientists are talking about things like increased storm intensity (which we are seeing), the migration of tropical diseases and fungi/bacteria environments northward and southward (this also has major public health implications - especially if healthcare is not available to large segments of a population, say, because of its cost or their immigration status)
Its also possible that some temperate areas (most of the US is in the temperate zone) that are currently viable for human habitation or farming might become hotter or sometimes, colder, and also perhaps somewhat nonviable for people.. (too hot for example.. without entailing prohibitive energy costs for cooling - or too dry...)
and also that areas currently not very viable.. (like some of the subarctic parts of Canada) might become viable, or even optimal....
This would be happening all over the world.. not just in any one country.. so we could see massive migrations of people trying to flee the suddenly inhispitable weather conditions..
At least, that is what one (unclassified) Pentagon report I saw forsaw..
NIH's Environmental Health Perspectives magazine also has done a lot of good articles about the health implications of climate change..
Worth reading..
See http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/topic/climate.html
You had a good point until here, and then you overreached. The disaster cleanup was FEMA's job.
You have to do a significant amount of "monday morning quarterbacking" and playing "professional disaster planner" to second-guess the local official's decisions. On the other hand, it's not that hard to realize that a president who should know a very serious national disaster is taking shape had better get his ass off of a golf-and-guitar vacation to oversee federal disaster recovery efforts.
So once again, we have the right wing pushing personal responsibility for everyone but them. And yet, you have the gall to shout about hypocrisy?
