quote:

Originally posted by occrider Ummm I think smokeape is criticizing those who live on the coasts outside the US and inside the US under the premise that when a hurricane hits florida, or a quake hits California, the rest of the country has to pay aid, insurance companies have to pay policies, and that makes life harder on people in "safe" areas. Of course using such logic, that would eliminate people from living in the SouthEast due to hurricanes, it would eliminate people living in California due to the fault lines, it would eliminate much of the western dry states because of forest fires, and it would eliminate much of of the mid-West/South region because of Tornado alley and flooding. So I guess everyone would have to live in the Northeast and along the Canadian border. As a representative of the Northeast I graciously invite the western seaboard to our cold but comfortable waters, and I respectfully direct those from the south/mid-west to seek shelter along the Canadian border.

Kinda, sorta. You hit it in your first sentence, then strayed with your own logic. My logic is that folks that live in these tidal zones and flood plains need to pay exhorbitant insurance rates and be lambasted by the media everytime they lose their possessions by being so stupid to live in such dangerous areas. As it is now, we are supposed to take pity on the ignorant. And yes, the same applies to the tsunami victims. They live in areas prone to historically documented catastrophies. I.E. - I live in Miami on the beach and will never have to worry about a hurricane... WTF are you kidding?


[[[smoke]]]

Interesting thing though, I saw an article that mentioned almost nothing has been given in terms of relief efforts with the civil war in the Congo. Millions of people have died in that struggle, yet little has been mentioned about it in the media and consequently no one knows that there is even a need there. Many people in the Congo have stated they believe the tsunami has brought so much more relief because many Europeans also were killed in that event. Sad to say, but I think they have a point. I went to work after the weekend of the tsunami and there were already people collecting money, just like at my friends' workplaces and schools as well, with some relief groups even saying they've already collected enough, yet we don't even hear about the death of millions in other places? This type of selective reporting is irresponsible, because it creates an environment where we hear about and consequently care about Saddam Hussein being a horrible leader and tsunami disasters, but barely realize about other far more repressive govenments and what is going on in Sudan, the Congo or Colombia. Or maybe it's those people's faults for living in those countries?

___________________
Download My Spring '08 Mix Here

Thurs May 15: Influence @ Tini Martini w/ Kris B. vs. Nosmo, Rikler & Mike Palmeri
Thurs June 5: Under the Influence @ Tini Martini w/Mathias Matthew, Jack Kim & more TBA

quote:

Originally posted by smokeape Kinda, sorta. You hit it in your first sentence, then strayed with your own logic. My logic is that folks that live in these tidal zones and flood plains need to pay exhorbitant insurance rates and be lambasted by the media everytime they lose their possessions by being so stupid to live in such dangerous areas. As it is now, we are supposed to take pity on the ignorant. And yes, the same applies to the tsunami victims. They live in areas prone to historically documented catastrophies. I.E. - I live in Miami on the beach and will never have to worry about a hurricane... WTF are you kidding? [[[smoke]]]

These people should pay more in insurance for those types of disasters and I believe they do already, because insurance costs & premiums are always calculated by risk. For example, if I am a 16 year old male driver, I pay way more for car insurance than a 50 year old female driver with no accidents or tickets on their record. The problem with disaster insurance is that that it affects all the people paying the high premiums. When Hurricane Andrew struck Florida, the insurance companies could not pay out enough as they were supposed too, because everyone was affected at once, rather than only some houses being damaged.

___________________
Download My Spring '08 Mix Here

Thurs May 15: Influence @ Tini Martini w/ Kris B. vs. Nosmo, Rikler & Mike Palmeri
Thurs June 5: Under the Influence @ Tini Martini w/Mathias Matthew, Jack Kim & more TBA

quote:

Originally posted by wolverine16 Interesting thing though, I saw an article that mentioned almost nothing has been given in terms of relief efforts with the civil war in the Congo. Millions of people have died in that struggle, yet little has been mentioned about it in the media and consequently no one knows that there is even a need there. Many people in the Congo have stated they believe the tsunami has brought so much more relief because many Europeans also were killed in that event. Sad to say, but I think they have a point. I went to work after the weekend of the tsunami and there were already people collecting money, just like at my friends' workplaces and schools as well, with some relief groups even saying they've already collected enough, yet we don't even hear about the death of millions in other places? This type of selective reporting is irresponsible, because it creates an environment where we hear about and consequently care about Saddam Hussein being a horrible leader and tsunami disasters, but barely realize about other far more repressive govenments and what is going on in Sudan, the Congo or Colombia. Or maybe it's those people's faults for living in those countries?

i do agree with you, however i think tranceaholic had a good explaination of this a few days ago... africa does not have the same kind of hope for the future that south east asia has (less wars, more economic development etc), the problems in africa is also to a much bigger extent their own faults, meanwhile a tsunami cannot be effected by any human beeing.

Reading in the sunday papers today the amount of aid agencys that have stopped accepting donations for the disaster in asia..seems kind of odd..ok people give for a certain disaster fund but it would seem illogical to stop people donating money which could be used for projects elsewhere in the world..anyway just a thought

And another thought whilst im on the subject..the american red cross went from being a 10 billion dollar organisation prior to 9/11 and about a month later went to being a 100 billion dollar organisation..what did they do with the money..do they still have most of it? just curious if anybody knows

quote:

Originally posted by zig ..ok people give for a certain disaster fund but it would seem illogical to stop people donating money which could be used for projects elsewhere in the world..anyway just a thought

It would also be kinda 'unethical' to collect money that people think is going to help the Tsunami victims and then funnel it to some other unrelated area.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus It would also be kinda 'unethical' to collect money that people think is going to help the Tsunami victims and then funnel it to some other unrelated area.

i sort of said that in the origional post..but why not just say to people who want to donate money,this project is now funded but we have other projects ongoing around the world if you would still like to contribute..people at the minute are into giving because of the media coverage ..well if i was fundraiser for a relief agency thats how i would explain it to them..and at the same time relieve them of their cash..and the burden of not being able to donate..clear consciences for all

This is a ridiculous argument. Nothing of this magnitude has occurred in the area in recent memory. Natural disasters of different sorts affect ALL areas eventually. Heck one day New York is bound to have a major earthquake. Geological forces are dynamic; over the eons all areas on the planet will be subjected to some sort of cataclysmic change. So where are people supposed to live?
You speak of insurance rates but you fail to realize just how vital coastal communities/provinces/states are to national economies. In the US, California has the largest economy of any state…it’s the 8th largest economy in the world. The Long Beach dock is extremely vital to trade w/ the Pacific. If it were to shut down it would be disastrous for the US (hence the reason unionized dockworkers there are able to make 100K for blue collar work).
In countries like Thailand, the coastal regions drive the tourist industry which is a huge chunk of the economy. Lets us not forget the fishing and ports for trading.
BTW insurance rates maybe low, but the property values on coastal areas are extremely high.

quote:

Originally posted by Mensa This is a ridiculous argument. Nothing of this magnitude has occurred in the area in recent memory. Natural disasters of different sorts affect ALL areas eventually. Heck one day New York is bound to have a major earthquake. Geological forces are dynamic; over the eons all areas on the planet will be subjected to some sort of cataclysmic change. So where are people supposed to live? You speak of insurance rates but you fail to realize just how vital coastal communities/provinces/states are to national economies. In the US, California has the largest economy of any state…it’s the 8th largest economy in the world. The Long Beach dock is extremely vital to trade w/ the Pacific. If it were to shut down it would be disastrous for the US (hence the reason unionized dockworkers there are able to make 100K for blue collar work). In countries like Thailand, the coastal regions drive the tourist industry which is a huge chunk of the economy. Lets us not forget the fishing and ports for trading. BTW insurance rates maybe low, but the property values on coastal areas are extremely high.

These debates generally broaden out and i think most posters here would accept what what you have said.

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew the problems in africa is also to a much bigger extent their own faults

Come on man,
really...

___________________