Gustav

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I've said that ultimately people are responsible for evaluating their own risk level, BUT, if I'm given bad info and make a decision based on that bad info... shouldn't there be some recourse?

If a bank tells you that you don't need flood insurance because you lived in a low risk area... is it so unreasonable to think that some people might decline the coverage?

We sure are quick to bail out bad decisions made by big corporations, but when the little guy makes a bad decision all bets are off it seems.

I submit the following:
I am all about the little guy! I am one
I don't know what info was disseminated by the banking community to the the residents of NO, thus I am not really qualified to make that call.
I am confident we are multiple Billions in the hole in bailout aid.
How much bailout money is acceptable?
Why do we keep hearing about NO and not the other natural disasters that occur in this country?

I think people have to help themselves, and not depend on the Fed to take care of them. I do not think that happened in this case.
An incompetent mayor, and Governor did not help. And the Fed is dirty as well.
In 1983 Hurricane Alicia cruised through the Houston area at about 130+mph, gusting to 160+, spawning an estimated 220+ tornadoes in the area. It gutted much of the area. I lost half the tree's in my yard (8 oaks). Roof damage, etc. I was lucky. We had no power for 13 days (houston in august, working basically 24/7)
The power company came by one day 12 and told myself and my neighbors it would be 45 days to get the lines clear of trees and restore service. We explained the lines would be clear by daylight. The sound of chain saws went on through the night, but the line got cleared and we got power back (i said htown in august right?) the next day.
We helped ourselves, as many others do as well in such disasters.
I hope you enjoyed my little story!