I want to ask a question. Is it moral to capitalize on catastrophes to achieve political objectives that will do little to reduce the losses of the present catastrophe or deal with its aftermath?
I think it can be only justified on instrumental grounds and instrumentalists have the problem that they do not have enough information to make the judgments they must make.
I think it’s immoral because it makes persons into means rather than ends.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. There’s right ways and wrong ways to go about it, and the appearance of that one is capitalizing on a crisis rather than acting as a human being is purely subjective.
Someone’s wife is not capitalizing on a crisis if she points out that their tendency to drink 12-18 beers a night was the cause of them driving into a telephone pole, but they may say that because they don’t want to give up drinking.
I think it’s legit with Houston, where unregulated development is going to be blamed for making the flooding worse. Same goes with climate change.
“Is it moral to capitalize on catastrophes to achieve political objectives that will do little to reduce the losses of the present catastrophe or deal with its aftermath?”
I don’t know if it’s moral, but I believe it’s inevitable – it happens in every crisis.
@MM: Houston is not unregulated; it participates in the federal flood insurance program, which means it has requirements specific to flooding issues. I don’t doubt that we’ll learn at some point in time that Houston’s approach to compliance was minimal, plus the flood maps need to be updated more frequently in fast-growing areas. But most discussions are not about flood regulations.
I was referring to this, from a Pro Publica article:
Many scientists, experts and federal officials say Houston’s explosive growth is largely to blame, along with climate change. As millions have flocked to the metropolitan area in recent decades, local officials have largely rejected stricter building regulations, allowing developers to pave over acres of prairie land that once absorbed large amounts of rainwater.
Here’s the link to the article.. It’s from 2016. Not being an expert on flood management or how prairies handle rainwater, I have no clue. ProPublica is a pretty reliable source. Regardless it’s not immoral to make the claim that poorly-regulated or unregulated development made the flooding worse.
IMO there’s a more serious and more basic problem. Major cities are rising in places that weren’t population centers in the past and are not naturally suited for large scale development. However, since I think it’s wrong to dwell on this issue while the disaster is ongoing, I will postpone my remarks until later.
Houston isn’t the only city with this problem. Los Angeles, San Diego, Miami, New Orleans, the list is practically endless. Boston has historically had a large population as have New York and St. Louis. Los Angeles? Not so much.
MM,
I can’t find the paragraph you quoted in the link you cited which focuses on stormsurge protection of industrial areas and not the rainwater flooding the area (not just Houston) is currently experiencing.
Andy–
it’s this: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/harvey
“Many scientists, experts and federal officials say …….. along with climate change.”
I guess the last Chicken Little warning of Gulf hurricanes followed by a reduction in occurance doesn’t count. Experts my ass.
Who is up for not building cities below sea level in hurricane alley? I know, it’s a crazy notion.
Drew, you’re simply being too pragmatic!
MM,
Got to this,
“It underscores a new reality for the nation’s fourth-largest city: Climate change is making such storms more routine.”
Actually, that is not true according to the IPCC:
As for the rest of it, I think the basic premise that more development tends to make flooding worse is probably true, but no just because of land development. Having lived in both Texas and Florida, for example, there is a major difference in flood planning. Florida regularly sees heavy rains and so things like retention pods and drainage channels are requirements in new developments. But even with those measures, most parts of central Florida (where I lived), would experience severe flooding if it received the amount of rain that Houston is getting. If Houston had Florida’s drainage requirements it would still be bad there.
Additionally, the article seems to confuse building regulations with zoning. Building regulations don’t reduce flooding damage unless you require that homes be put on stilts. The problem is really zoning and, as Guarneri points out, growth in areas that probably aren’t ideal locations for cities.
Andy,
There has been a lot of coverage about the storm’s intensification and how warmer waters fueled that, as well as the effects of rising sea level and moisture in the air. There are no climate scientists proposing that climate change caused the hurricane. Problem with climate change is that it may be part of the why. It makes asking why this storm and the flooding were so intense a political topic.
It’s really interesting to look at empirical evidence-based pre-Columbian population density maps of North America. Basically, they show us where the big cities would be in 1900. South Florida, Houston, and New Orleans were all swamps. Nobody lived there.
The St. Louis metropolitan area on the other hand had the highest population density north of the Rio Grande for most of the last millennium. The upper Midwest and some areas of the Northeast were big population centers, too.
MM,
I was responding to a (false) claim of fact in the article – a claim that I’ve seen frequently repeated in the last few days.
Dave,
Great point. The success of modern cities seems to be less and less about geography than other factors.
Regarding Pre-Colombian settlement patterns – that would at first glance be correlated to the level of agricultural technology available vs vulnerability to natural disaster.
China pre 800AD had denser settlement on the Yellow river then the Yangtze River; but once the Chinese mastered the crops and techniques to farm further South, the center of Chinese civilization moved to the Yangtze River delta.
Similarly, the lack of Pre Columbian settlement in the rich soil of the Lower Mississippi River seems related to technology.
Anyway, given the Mississippi flows out there and the oil / gas in Texas and along the Gulf Coast – ports and cities developing there is ineveritable.
South Florida does an excellent job of water management. We had 30 some odd inches in two days earlier this summer. But it was an on-the-edge situation. I can’t imagine 50.
Also, fun facts to impress your friends. The change in elevation from shore to the heart of the Everglades is………wait…..3 feet. That’s why water flows south to the gulf/Atlantic like molasses. But hey, better than 20 feet below sea level and dependent on dikes able to withstand only Level 3 hurricanes…… Also, It’s technically a marsh, not a swamp, as the primary vegetation is grassy, not woody. Vital knowledge.
Let me get this straight. In addition to closing down New Orleans, we need to shut down Houston, and we need to relocate New Orleans and Houston to Naples, FL. Should we include all coastal areas including NYC? What about California – earthquakes, Nebraska – tornados, Phoenix – sinking?
Living in Florida should make one a little more sensitive to water issues, but I guess not.
Since I doubt that our newest Floridian has never engaged in any hurricane related activities, here are a few pointers.
First, leave early. This means you will be evacuating a lot because forecasts are only accurate for 24-48 hours. Take a look at the forecasts for the path before the hurricane hits. Which means that all the time it is not headed for you, it is going to land in your area.
Leaving early is important because in a traffic jam you are no better than anybody else. You should make sure that you have your vehicles gassed up.
Now, it may seem to be a good idea to take the fancy Porsche, but unless you have all your belongs in containers that can withstand wind and water damage, you will want to take the important stuff. Be advised that a wife and daughter may have a different idea of what is important.
Second, take your important things that cannot be replaced. It may be a good idea to purchase a larger vehicle for the eventual evacuation. It is not a good idea to wait until the last minute to decide what is saved. Anything not taken may be destroyed.
We have a closet with boxes and plastic containers ready to go, but my wife still lost unreplaceable things in Katrina. Also, during active seasons, we leave the stack by the front door.
Active seasons, we have not had many for the past 10 years. Florida can have more than one hurricane per season. It would be advised to be well prepared during that time. I suspect that many of the new Floridians have no idea of what a hurricane entails.
Fun fact: The ‘storm surge’ is water that is being lifted by the lower pressure above it, and the ‘storm surge’ is above sea level. This is not water being pushed by wind, and it is not from rain. Those are two additional factors.
Personally, I would be careful fucking with karma. It has a way of kicking you in the balls.
“At least you are still alive” is a load of shit. Your stuff is part of your life, and the things that cannot be replaced are the parts of you that died. It is humbling to not be able to fix something no matter how hard you try.
Oh yeah, make sure that you have flood insurance. You know, the government socialized kind.
No but the people who live there should recognize the implications of their choices. They’re going to be exposed to hurricanes and flooding from the storm surge that follows. Evacuation may be impossible because of the sheer number of people involved.
And we shouldn’t subsidize living there any more than we should subsidize living in the flood plain of the Mississippi.
That’s a lot of words for someone who didn’t actually read the comment, or spend two seconds to consider the snark.
BTW – You simply can’t evacuate a city like Houston. It’s physically impossible, and admonition to leave early enough would be ignored as the probability of hitting Houston at that time would be too problematic.
Separately, as for New Orleans, we are often told how we need government to handle “big things.” And yet we spend a lot of money on buildings with politicians names on them. The fanciest building in town is often the police station. And lord knows we take a lot of money from A to give it to B. But given the realities of New Orleans existence we might want to consider redoing levees able to withstand a Category 5, not a 3. Else it’s just a matter of time until Katrina II.
You can go back to angry old man mode now……….
A lot of smug North Easterners thought they were immune from catastrophic natural disasters. Like I said, karma has a way of kicking you in the balls. If I lived in Florida, I would not fuck with karma, but I am not the brightest.
As to New Orleans levees, Cat 3 should be the goal. Cat 5 was a political decision. Cat 5 winds (155+ mph) are catastrophic, and there is little point to having an intact levee with everything else flattened.
I do not want to kick Houston, but Houston and Texas should have developed an evacuation plan after the Rita evacuation disaster. Remember, that was the evacuation that Republicans declared was the textbook example.
Whether Houston should have evacuated is another matter. Evacuations are costly, and for poorer people, it can be financially impossible. People with the means often do not understand the problems. The raggedy-assed car that gets you to and from your low paying job is likely to breakdown. For the majority of false alarms, you will not be paid for not working.
As mean and nasty as I am, I would not wish this on you, but I would not shed a tear if it did. I am more concerned with your wife and daughter. Try consoling your wife over her pictures of your future grandchildren (hopefully) because you all forgot it in a lower bookshelf. I do not have a problem with you drowning trying to save your fancy sports car. (My compassion has limits.)
For the record, I think that the rebuilding of New Orleans was a disaster. The rich white progressives used it as a way to rid the city of poor black (and white) people. People without flood insurance should not have been given money, but I would have provided free or low cost building materials.
The federal government should have provided money to rebuild the infrastructure. Charity Hospital was ready to be re-opened, but it was condemned to allow the government to fund a fancy new public hospital. This was ludicrous. The new VA was a government building, but it could have been re-opened.
As to Katrina II, I would suggest that you learn a little more about hurricanes and the effects, and you might want to ensure that you are prepared.
Also, I doubt that you would be living in paradise if the government had not helped rebuild after Andrew. As usual, asshole Republicans conveniently pretending like they are not the beneficiaries of “government free stuff”. I have no doubt that you would be driving your fancy sports car to get to the head of the line for your government check, including money from socialized flood insurance.