My brother sent me this mocking picture making the rounds on the Internet. I thought it was àpropos in the aftermath of Hurricane Irene. The coverage in Washington of the hurricane-that-wasn’t has been absolutely bizarre. It is good to see that this city does not just panic with an inch of snow. We panic with any weather above a flurry or a misting. Folks in parts of North Carolina and other coastal areas have had legitimate concerns (including New York, Vermont and other areas) and Irene’s flooding and power outages were expected to take quite a toll in those hardest hit areas. However, the D.C. coverage was comically ridiculous. I watched one story of how Irene had began “its trail of misery and destruction” toward Washington. General Sherman’s March To the Sea had less dire reviews. I am only talking about Northern Virginia and Washington where the coverage continued in sharp contrast with the actual forecasted weather for our area.
I have been admittedly snarky of the coverage for days, particularly the last 24-hours when the hurricane was a Cat-1 hitting hundreds of miles away. Having lived through pretty big hurricanes in Louisiana, I have a respect for the storms but there was never any predictions of serious rain in my area. For days, I have been checking the various weather sites only to find predictions of two inches of rain and strong winds on Saturday night (with clearing on Sunday). I would then turn on the television or go on the Internet and find live, round-the-clock, breathless coverage of the “misery” and “destruction” coming to Washington. At no time did the forecast predict anything more than roughly a couple inches of rain and high winds. There was clearly a chance for power outages due to the soaked soil and winds, but the coverage in this area was positively apocalyptic.
In addition to ratings, the hysteria did produce record sales at stores as people prepared for the apocalypse with bodies stacked like firewood in the streets.
Everything closed despite the fact that only two inches of rain and some strong winds were predicted. This morning, the coverage continues with reporters showing the same pictures of a couple of trees down to fill time. The rest of the coverage is largely “things that did not happen” stories. My favorite this morning on Channel 4 (NBC) was how in Alexandria the harbor man thought that people who tied up their boats for high tide might have to come back and tie the boats for lower tide. The reporter then went to show how the water has not risen and how high water could have been a problem in causing flooding — if there was high water. As predicted in the actual forecasts for days before the hurricane (as opposed to the news coverage), we had some trees down, some power outages, and rain. Various forecasters (here and here) objected to the overblown claims in places like Washington before the storm hit.
I was not alone in feeling a significant loss of credibility for our local media in the hype leading to the storm — which seemed overtly disconnected to the actual predictions of rain and wind. Of course, at the coast, there were some curious moments such as the reporter who gave a live account while covered in what appears toxic foam.
We decided not to join the apocalyptic preparations and instead invited a couple of the friends of the kids over for a hurricane party and sleepover. Our power went off for exactly twenty seconds, but we had a grand time and watched “Cats v. Dogs” while devouring bags of popcorn. The overkill coverage will only make it more difficult for media and the government to get people to believe them next time when there is a serious threat, in my view.
Of course, most everything is still closed today as we clean up the carnage of blown leaves and soggy lawns in our area. In your view, was Irene overblown?
Gene H:
If you had user fees for infrastructure, Warren Buffet would be paying more wouldnt he.
You just want government control, it has nothing to do with paying taxes. Taxes allow government to do pretty much anything they want with our money.
About 85% of our critical infrastructure is privately held. The gas, electricty, sewer, telecommunications, and water companies are privately held. My phone, water and sewer rates are pretty reasonable, and reliable.
There are some things, like roads, that I don’t think could be privately held without becoming a problem. Turnpikes, now that electronic payment is available, could be the way of the future. It has been my experience that most turnpikes are pretty decent.
Roco,
If anyone is guilty of a straw man fallacy here, it’d be you defending private profits at the expense of public use which will be limited by a private owned/user fee infrastructure scheme. Yet you are so close to the answer: an equitable tax code where the wealthy DO pay more in proportionate taxes than the poor. They receive greater benefit from society, they should pay a greater share – all of them, equally. Taxation takes the volitional component out of the equation. All should pay. All should pay a fair proportionate share. Our tax code needs to be fair. Warren Buffet should pay the same or higher tax rate than his secretary. He makes more money. His business interests benefit proportionately more from public infrastructure than the average person. He (and his brethren) should shoulder more of the costs and not for profit and not at the cost of removing the “public” from public infrastructure.
Mike Spindell:
you are guilty of the straw man fallacy. People who think like me want better infrastructure and are willing to pay for it. We believe the overall burden to everyone would be less if infrastructure was built by private investors and paid for by usage fees.
Why do you want the poor working mother barely making ends meet feeding her 5 children to subsidize a wealthy businessman to take a first class plane ride from Atlanta to New York?
Man, I would say you are much friendlier to the rich than I am. I think the rich ought to pay for the services they use. Why should the rest of us subsidize their extravagant lifestyles with tax subsidies?
DownEast Liberator, ain’t that the truth! When you have a rudder out, the engine is smoking and the boat is taking on water, that red racing stripe looks awfully good when it heaves into view. Semper Paratus, mate!
roco,
Going to work every day is a voluntary activity in reality with no criminal implications….Really, it is….If you want to eat, have a place to live…sleep…be left alone….and if you don’t go….what are they going to do to you…I think contract for Indentured Servants are illegal…call be old fashioned in that regards…
In the service once you volunteer…You have made a commitment for a term of years….with criminal implications if you refuse to perform and you are capable…….. Unless you name is Bush….
Ask the crew aboard any fishing vessel if they’d want to depend on “help for hire” services when the weather gets bad. The fishing fleets of New England hold the CG in high esteem for their bravery and faithful service be it searching for a lost crew & boat or something as mundane as maintaining bouys and navigation aids.
Roco sez: “The Coast Guard is a volunteer service. They go because they wish to help people in distress and they understand the risks. They could make far more in the private sector doing the same job.”
****************************************
My point exactly. The private sector CANNOT do what the USCG does on a daily basis, seldom making headlines. Neither can the Navy; different mission, different training.
mespo:
Jon Ward
jon.ward@huffingtonpost.com
Michele Bachmann Says Hurricane Irene And Earthquake Are Divine Warnings To Washington
“WASHINGTON – Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann told Floridians Sunday that Hurricane Irene and the earthquake felt along much of the East Coast last week were messages from God to warn “politicians” to start heeding divine guidance, which she suggested is being channeled through small government conservatives.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/michele-bachmann-hurricane-irene_n_940209.html
roco,
Would you endanger your life for a private corporation….I think the WC rules specifically prohibit an employer to require an employee to work in a known dangerous job…but then again…You are probably for CAPS….
OSHA covers this: Maritime safety: Like the construction industry, due to inherent concerns regarding the safety of maritime workers, OSHA creates and enforces regulations to safeguard workers in the maritime industry.
Do you think that the US Government abides by the same rules and game plan…If so…tell be about why Air crafts do not have to have mufflers….why military vehicles do not have to have a MPG….I am waiting…
Otteray Scribe:
The Coast Guard is a volunteer service. They go because they wish to help people in distress and they understand the risks. They could make far more in the private sector doing the same job.
Roco
1, August 29, 2011 at 11:32 am
AY:
I didnt say they just protected private companies. I said private companies could do most of the work the USCG does. The Navy could do the rest.
The fact that it was started by Alexander Hamilton gives cause to believe it is a useless tool. Wasnt he for central banks as well?
******************
How do you think merchant marines are able to get goods to other port…. I think it is illegal to use the USN during peacetime…The coast guard was specifically designed to aide the transportation of good and is was not seen as acts of aggression….
Though that role has changed dramatically in the last 210 years…
Do you think that private companies should be in the arena of defense….some people think not…
Roco (and kindred spirits), you are not going to be able to hire employees to do what the Coast Guard does on a daily basis for regular enlisted pay. First of all, when they get a call, the Regulations specify that they have to go out. There is nothing in the regulations about coming back. Here is a rescue surfboat–watch it till the end of the video:
It never ceases to amaze me at how the budget cutting/private ownership crowd is so happy with an America of rotting infrastructure. Other nations are proud of their public works and their maintenance of same. here we are overrun with people who want it all on the cheap tax wise and don’t care what the country looks like.
AY, that’s our Roco. Often wrong, never uncertain.
AY:
I didnt say they just protected private companies. I said private companies could do most of the work the USCG does. The Navy could do the rest.
The fact that it was started by Alexander Hamilton gives cause to believe it is a useless tool. Wasnt he for central banks as well?
Some of the storm skepticism comes from the same place climate change denial comes from.
A professor at UCSD lays out the history of climate change science (1850 – 2011).
She also lays out the origin and development of climate change denial.
Here is a link to the video of the lecture.
NoWay:
After watching the natural destruction of that bridge and last year’s MetroDome football stadium collapse from snow pack, I am anxiously awaiting the inevitable conclusion from our god-fearing brethren that God likes to see us wherever we are and will not tolerate the wicked coverings we place on bridges and football stadiums. I also expect to learn that gays, atheists, and agnostics had some role in the planning, design, and building of these structures. In the words of my more pious friends: “you can’t prove He didn’t do it.” Indeed, maybe He just likes football and the undisturbed sound, “clickety-clack.”
Hurricane Irene’s N.J. legacy just beginning as floodwaters rise and commutes are obstructed
Published: Monday, August 29, 2011, 6:00 AM Updated: Monday, August 29, 2011, 9:31 AM
By Mark Mueller/The Star-Ledger
“It will go down as one of the most damaging storms to hit New Jersey in a century, if not in recorded history.
The state’s rivers, swollen by Irene’s relentless downpours, began spilling their banks Sunday, inundating backyards and basements, major highways and downtown streets. Many waterways were still rising, suggesting the worst is yet to come.”
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/08/hurricane_irenes_nj_legacy_jus.html
Roco,
I wish cutbacks were so easy.
Our population has increased since 1995, 2000, and 2008. It will continue to grow. To provide the same level of service, it’s not hard to figure out that more material costs more.
I think there are cuts that can be made, but I don’t see just going back to a previous date or a certain percentage per year to be something that has any basis. I’m sure there is waste that needs to be addressed. There always is. But I think we need to look at the desired level of service, establish that, and then look to see where cuts can be made and how much they can be.