Rich people complain about FEMA trailer park

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/us/nationalspecial/05trailers.html

Basicly, FEMA built a small trailer park for hurricane victims left homeles. The trailer park was built next to a very wealthy neighborhood. Now all the rich people are bitching about it because they have to have a trailer park near their house for homeless familys that lost everything in the hurricane. I might have some sympahy for these fucktards if it was temporary, but it isn't!

― mantilla, Saturday, 8 April 2006 11:00 (twenty years ago)

I meant to say "I might have some sympahy for these fucktards if it wasn't temporary, but it is!"

― mantilla, Saturday, 8 April 2006 11:02 (twenty years ago)

rich people in being self-important twats shockah.

― Special Agent Gene Krupa (orion), Saturday, 8 April 2006 13:48 (twenty years ago)

Ray Nagin in being self-serving douchebag shockah

― Big Willy and the Twins (miloaukerman), Saturday, 8 April 2006 13:57 (twenty years ago)

he is like most politicians, in that respect.

― Special Agent Gene Krupa (orion), Saturday, 8 April 2006 14:01 (twenty years ago)

There are better places to build trailer parks than in Algiers. Commuting from the West Bank is a nightmare, especially if you don't have a car (as these women probably don't). That said, 34 trailers is not a lot.

I'm really sick of people bitching about Ray Nagin--he stood up for us. He says all kinds of crazy shit. He's SO MUCH FUCKING BETTER THAN THE ALTERNATIVES which include the current LA LG who is bullshit NO politics down to the bone. Also Ron Forman, head of the Audubon Nature Institute, where I worked for 3 years. That guy is a fucking moron who can't even run a zoo correctly.

My hatred of Ron Forman is all-consuming so I won't go into it here. Just know that from a New Orleanian perspective, Ray Nagin is the way to go.

― adam (adam), Saturday, 8 April 2006 14:56 (twenty years ago)

I hope Nagin gets re-elected, too. Otherwise it will be just another way for Bush supporters to convince people that the Katrina disaster was his fault and the federal government shouldn't be held responsible.

― someone let this mitya out! (mitya), Saturday, 8 April 2006 17:17 (twenty years ago)

absolute cunts

― petlover, Saturday, 8 April 2006 21:20 (twenty years ago)

On a happy note: the Louisiana Strawberry Festival in Ponchatoula is underway all like "what hurricane?" I'm going to go enjoy my post-festival strawberry coma.

― adam (adam), Saturday, 8 April 2006 21:22 (twenty years ago)

Given that the older, larger homes on Esplanade and in the Garden District routinely fetch prices in excess of 2 million dollars – this is not exactly a few crackpots quibbling about $20 – 30 K. It is people who through their own labor – or likely quite a few through well planned births – who are looking at several hundred thousand dollars eroding from a major asset.

Also, they are people who were there for this same storm. So you feel their losses – many of them looking at wealth diminished by millions as businesses and other investments were washed into the Gulf – should now have to deal with more loss? When is it enough that you would consider them victims, too?

There are always at least two sides to every story.

― Lovelace (Lovelace), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:09 (twenty years ago)

But it's temporary.

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:28 (twenty years ago)

Temporary FEMA trailer parks are never temporary. Ask the folks in Florida in which there are entire cities created in the middle of nowhere with refugees from hurricanes that happened years ago. Between their own financial problems and FEMA mismanagement, these people have either been unwilling or unable to leave. Thus, I would assume that most of the parks created after Katrina will last as long as possible.

― Lovelace (Lovelace), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:33 (twenty years ago)

finally, someone brave enough to stand up for the wealthy

― +++++++, Monday, 10 April 2006 13:42 (twenty years ago)

"It's bad," Mr. Markle said. "You've got a thousand locations that are better. I won't be able to take a bath without them seeing me."

Oh - I hadn't realized that the trailer parks were actually built in the gigantic bathrooms of these poor, poor rich people's houses.

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:44 (twenty years ago)

The whole world should feel guilt if, as it is, living next to the poor people decreases property values, and that in itself is more important than poverty or homelessness.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:47 (twenty years ago)

I.e. fuck capitalism!

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:48 (twenty years ago)

Reading about the plight of these poor, poor rich people really tugs at your heart strings. Oh the tragedy of having their multi-million dollar estates decrease in value by these roaming filthy criminal types who just turned up out of the blue like that - don't they understand the awful repercussions of their homelessness? How selfish of them.

xpost

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:50 (twenty years ago)

"Make Poverty Somewhere Else"

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:51 (twenty years ago)

anybody else gettin a ghost of xmas past/bob cratchit irony vibe off this

― ++++++, Monday, 10 April 2006 13:52 (twenty years ago)

Surplus population, Ethan. Off with their heads!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 10 April 2006 13:57 (twenty years ago)

Where is the irony in a situation wherein people are upset that they're being taken advantage of due to their wealth? What's the irony in people not liking the fact that their home, the only asset they may have in the wake of a tragedy which likely destroyed their business and source of income, is being devalued by?

― Lovelace (Lovelace), Monday, 10 April 2006 15:08 (twenty years ago)

Because of their wealth or in spite of their wealth?

― Fight the Real Enemy -- Tasti D-Lite (ex machina), Monday, 10 April 2006 15:10 (twenty years ago)

"taken advantage of due to their wealth"

― +++++, Monday, 10 April 2006 15:11 (twenty years ago)

I think the point of criticism here is that,

a) living next to "suspicious" people shouldn't devalue anything,

b) people who complain how they're million dollar houses are being devalued by homeless people are bound to sound smug, whether or not they're hurricane victims too, and

c) if they indeed have suffered because of the hurricane, they should at least express some solidarity.

(xx-post)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 10 April 2006 15:14 (twenty years ago)

but they were rich already!! they have nothing in common with this human garbage!!

― ++++++, Monday, 10 April 2006 15:15 (twenty years ago)

white man's burden, dude

― the man from mars won't eat up bars where the tv's on (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 10 April 2006 15:16 (twenty years ago)

some whites are MINORITIES in their own POST CODES!!!!!!!

― ++++++, Monday, 10 April 2006 15:17 (twenty years ago)

11206

― Fight the Real Enemy -- Tasti D-Lite (ex machina), Monday, 10 April 2006 15:22 (twenty years ago)

The whole argument from the pro-victims camp in this exchange seems to be that because rich people are rich, they should have to deal with this. Because of that, I can posit that they are being taken advantage of because of their wealth. Trailers aren't being set up on the lawns of the lower-middle classes: they're being set up around estates. Is it because there's more space on a rich person's estate? Sure, but that space belongs to someone and it shouldn't be able to be appropriated like that.

― Lovelace (Lovelace), Monday, 10 April 2006 16:06 (twenty years ago)

Yes, the property of poor people has never been appropriated for government purposes. Ever visited the neighborhood around an interstate?

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Monday, 10 April 2006 16:11 (twenty years ago)

Trailers aren't being set up on the lawns of the lower-middle classes

Did you read the fucking article? There are tons of fucking evacuee camps.

― Fight the Real Enemy -- Tasti D-Lite (ex machina), Monday, 10 April 2006 16:12 (twenty years ago)

Sure, but that space belongs to someone and it shouldn't be able to be appropriated like that.

Space shouldn't belong to whoever pays the most for, but whoever needs it the most.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 10 April 2006 16:14 (twenty years ago)

"pays the most for it"

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 10 April 2006 16:14 (twenty years ago)

They should build a Mormon temple nearby to counteract this, LDS leaders are always saying it increses property values.

― Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 10 April 2006 17:36 (twenty years ago)

because rich people are rich, they should have to deal with this.

Yes, they should. But, whatever. If these fortunate people want to live life surrounded by gates and surveillance cameras, I have no idea what they are thinking or why, anyway.

― dar1a g (daria g), Monday, 10 April 2006 17:53 (twenty years ago)

because rich people are rich, they should be drawn, quartered and ground into food for the poor.

― Big Willy and the Twins (miloaukerman), Monday, 10 April 2006 18:12 (twenty years ago)

didnt yalls moms teach you to share

― +--++-++--+, Monday, 10 April 2006 18:14 (twenty years ago)

or did the rich kids in kindergarten get 10x as many animal crackers at nap time based on their parents net worth

― +--++-++--+, Monday, 10 April 2006 18:15 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.