Crass question: Could Bush be keeping people in NO and slowing aid...

[FormerRepublican]

...so that people will die and not cost the government money? I mean, think about it. 1 Million homeless people will cost the feds loads of bucks on housing, food stamps, unemployment, etc. And since Bush and pals lack the reasonable person's value for human life, it would make sense to them to off a bunch of people to keep the deficit in control. Especially since their base will be screaming left and right about how they have to pay taxes to support the welfare babies evacuated from New Orleans. Heck, it could even lead to a resurgence of public assistance. :sarcasm:

I wonder if half of this chaos might be about greedy people conserving dollars at the expense of American lives. Bush did meet with Greenspan before he did anything else.

[wli]

1. We need the UN there NOW! n/t

[Erika]

2. The elderly and the sick are dropping like flies in NO

Seven have died since they were evac'd. Yes, SS and Medicare will profit.

[calimary]

3. Well, if it'll save a buck and let him send more money to his rich pals

in those permanent tax cuts he wants, why not?

Crass, yes, but these things need to be said, I think. Especially when we're talking about a guy who, along with the mafiosi he's assembled around him, has a black hole where his conscience should be. For him, the entire universe revolves around himself - and his lock on power, world conquest, control of the world's oil, and destroying his enemies - in any way he can get away with doing. He's never let something dumb like "doing the correct thing" get in the way of his own success. This guy's so dirty the water he swims in makes the flood waters in New Orleans look like the stuff in the Arrowhead bottles.

Crass, yes, but then we're talking about the most crass guy on the planet. He's literally a "crasshole." And what you suggest, frankly, is not beyond the realm of possibility, in the dark shadows of those closed-door meetings and lunches with Greenspan and whomever else he's fiddling with, while the rest of us burn.

[FloridaPat]

4. No. His rich friends already have plans on how to redo the city,

so less land owners around, less lawsuits.

[kestrel91316]

5. I think the plan all along was to let them f---ing drown in the flood.

But those brown people had the PURE UNMITIGATED GALL to survive in the face of terrible odds, and now look what a PITA they are.

THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ALL BE DEAD BY NOW. Just think of the savings to the government if they had had the good graces to f---ing die. :sarcasm: :banghead: :grr:

[Eloriel]

6. My theory

A little more complicated than that, but they won't mind at all if that happens:

ATTN DU RESEARCHERS -- LIHOP/MIHOP evidence stacking up
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4588088&mesg_id=4588088

[KT2000]

7. When they told them

to evacuate - those who did not became unimportant. In an ownsersip society, you get what you pay for and that's it.

I truly believe that the Bush administration thought the death toll of people who did not evacuate would be tolerable to the american public. He and his party truly do not care about people who do not buy their way. Tough luck!

What they did not count on was the aftermath being two separate incidents that created a slower moving catastrope - the media showing up to cover it - and the media turning on them.

Medicaid cuts are another slow moving disaster that they have been actively pushing. people will die but it is just an adminsitrative decision about a bunch of losers.

This is the heart of a "corporation" at work.