NBC just reported that the evacuation plans go like this -

[Sydnie]

First the sick will be bused out, the the TOURISTS! You know, those that have been staying in hotels and have been safe? They showed this picutre of a brigade of tourists dragging their wheeled suitcases behind them. How about those that have NO WHERE TO GO, the homeless and displaced that are in the shelters, or worse, in the elements? At long last have they no decency?

[NYC]

1. Maybe they are shipping out the tourists

because they DO have somewhere to go? Maybe they don't really have a place to put the true refugees yet. Just a thought.

[Caution]

2. There is a very good reason for this

The tourists have a home to go back to and can fend for and feed themselves thus not taking away aid and resources from those who actually need it. I understand that it seems like they are getting helped first but in fact this is the smart thing to do because reseources to feed, clothe and house perhaps hundreds of thousands aren't easy to come by. The less people you have to feed the better.

[puddycat]

3. since tourists are basically guests, they need to be "out of the way"

I have no problem with this plan, in my opinion they should have demanded the tourists leave before the storm even hit--made them get on buses to out-of-state airports if necessary. Since they don't live there, the quicker they get them out of the area the better.

[pstans]

4. Wouldn't have been smarter to evacuate everyone BEFORE the storm

Randi Rhodes mentioned this today. Why didn't Bu$h call up his buddies in the Airline industry and tell them to get all of their planes to NO and fly people to Atlanta, St. Louis, Memphis, Denver, Dallas, Houston, etc. Instead of having everyone go to the Superdome, should have sent them to the airport and gotten them out of there.

[mike_c]

5. this does make some sense, even if it's not the most...

...campassionate sounding choice. The tourists simply need to be gotten out and sent on their way. Little further infrastructure needs to be provided for most of them, so they CAN be gotten out and simply sent home quickly. Until then, they're simply contributing to clogging the evac. The truely dispossessed are going to need much more, and it doesn't make sense to simply get them out and deliver them to some nearby transportation hub. They have nowhere else to go. They still need rapid evac, but their problems don't stop there.

[Coastie for Truth]

6. Wrong Conclusion

The reason for moving the sick first is obvious.

You "push" the tourists out as soon as possible because there is a dollars per client per day COST associated with a "Mass Shelter." - And if somebody doesn't "Need" a shelter (i.e., they have the ability and opportunity to obtain housing, they have family, they have friends, they have a "network") -- you are better off marshalling your assets for those with a true need.

Those with "need", i.e., those that have NO WHERE TO GO, the homeless and displaced that are in the shelters, or worse, in the elements, will be fed, clothed, and sheltered, get health care, get counseling (kids and young adults go berserk in a shelter).

[merci_me]

7. I agree, move them out..........

wherever the tourists are staying and the food and water they are consuming is taking from others, who could use the resources. Ship out anyone who has a place to land and spend the resources on those in need.