Do you think if Katrina had hit Washington D.C. or NY or LA, it would have been handled the same way?

Question

Do you think if Katrina had hit Washington D.C. or NY or LA, it would have been handled the same way?

Answer 1

No, they had better state and local government in those places than what New Orleans had at that time.

Answer 2

lets place the blame of Katrina where it belongs. in any disaster there is a chain that is followed. mayor, governor and then the federal government.by the way, most people displaced by Katrina were white.

Answer 3

No! As matter of fact President Bush had already made plans for a Disaster Recovery Plan ( according to CNN) if this thing had came anywhere near there.He like other Republicans in Washington considers that as long as his rear end is covered that is as good as it gets!

Answer 4

Well, Tornados devastated many homes in the MidWest and other Bible belt states (with a majority of white people living there) just shortly after Katrina, and little to no assistance was given to them.

Just to let you know the D.C. highly populated by black people, L.A. by hispanic, and NY is pretty diverse, but all of these would recieve help fast as they are major cities.

Answer 5

Without reservations the demographic and spectrum would have drummed up focus on failed, ineptness to response or protect. The wheels of bureaucracy would have spin to no match ever seen to avail a resolution. Thus the lack luster support for McCain or the GOP.  

Answer 6

We'll see when LA is hit by a huge earthquake.  New York gets hit by a hurricane every 100 years or so.  New York also gets an earthquake every hundred years or so.

The British were chased out of Washington D.C. during the War of 1812 by a hurricane which spawned tornadoes.

In terms of their value to the American economy, New York, LA and Washington D.C. are of far greater importance than New Orleans.  The people of New Orleans have also had a 100 years to put in place a funding plan to address the risk to their city from hurricanes and flooding from the Mississippi River.  They chose to ignore the threat.  

Answer 7

Definitely not, if it hit anywhere near there it would have been a catastrophe to the government, and they would have acted a lot sooner, and, if possible, more efficiently.  

Answer 8

No, because it would not NEED to be handled the same way. Why? Because it would not had as much damage done, for two reasons:

1. They (DC and NY) are too far north that a hurricane could not develop to the strength that Katrina did, and the area around California doesn't have the sea temp nor the upper level winds needed to form or sustain a hurricane of that strength.

2. All three of these cities are much higher above sea level than NO is. Much of the damage in NO was caused by flooding when the levies broke.

Answer 9

Definitely not.

Answer 10

Nope. New Orleans is a dump. No matter what the government could do, it would still be a h**l-hole. Too bad it wasn't totally laid to waste.

Answer 11

Probably not.  

Answer 12

Well for LA yes since we have a lot of natural disasters here so we are well aware that one might hit any moment so we actually prepare for one. Thats the difference between us and the states hit during Katrina, they just weren't prepared to be hit by it so they paid the price for not being prepared.  

Answer 13

White Americans are racist its a fact. Well the rich ones anyways.

Answer 14

No, it would have been more dramatised on television.

Answer 15

It wouldn't have resulted in such a disaster since none of the cities you mentioned are below sea level.  So no, it would have been handled much differently but NOT because of racism, simply because it wouldn't have caused as much wide spread flooding.

Answer 16

Those cities are worth repairing.

Answer 17

Of course not. Racism abounds, so does the distinction between poverty and the rest of us...