Posted on 09/04/2005 9:38:42 PM PDT by logician2u
4 September 2005
Those who fervently wish for car-free cities should take a closer look at New Orleans. The tragedy of New Orleans isn't primarily due to racism or government incompetence, though both played a role. The real cause is automobility -- or more precisely to the lack of it.
"The white people got out," declared the New York Times today. But, as a chart in the Times article makes clear, the people who got out were those with automobiles. Those who stayed, regardless of color, were those who lacked autos.
What made New Orleans more vulnerable to catastrophe than most U.S. cities is its low rate of auto ownership. According to the 2000 Census, nearly a third of New Orleans households do not own an automobile. This compares to less than 10 percent nationwide. There are significant differences by race: 35 percent of black households but only 15 percent of white households do not own an auto. But in the end, it was auto ownership, not race, that made the difference between safety and disaster.
"The evacuation plan was really based on people driving out," an LSU professor told the Times. On Saturday and Sunday, August 27 and 28, when it appeared likely that Hurricane Katrina would strike New Orleans, those people who could simply got in their cars and drove away. The people who didn't have cars were left behind.
Critics of autos love the term "auto dependent." But Katrina proved that the automobile is a liberator. It is those who don't own autos who are dependent -- dependent on the competence of government officials, dependent on charity, dependent on complex and sometimes uncaring institutions.
As shown in the table below, the number of people killed by hurricanes in the U.S. steadily declined during the twentieth century. Economists commonly attribute such declines to increasing wealth. Wealth differences are also credited with the large number of disaster-related deaths in developing nations vs. developed nations. But what makes wealthier societies less vulnerable to natural disaster? There are several factors, but the most important is mobility.
Number of Deaths Caused by Hurricanes in the U.S. 1900-1919 10,000 1920-1939 3,751 1940-1959 1,119 1960-1979 453 1980-1999 57Source: Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory. Number for 1900-1919 is estimated as the exact death toll from 1900 Galveston hurricane is unknown.
People with access to autos can leave an area before it is flooded or hit with hurricanes, tornados, or other storms. When earthquakes or storms strike too suddenly to allow prior evacuation, people with autos can move away from areas that lack food, safe water, or other essentials.
Numerous commentators have legitimately criticized the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other government agencies for failing to foresee the need for evacuation, failing to secure enough buses or other means of evacuation, and failing to get those buses to people who needed evacuation. But people who owned autos didn't need to rely on the competence of government planners to be safe from Katrina and flooding. They were able to save themselves by driving away. Most apparently found refuge with friends or in hotels many miles from the devastation. Meanwhile, those who didn't have autos were forced into high-density, crime-ridden refugee camps such as the Superdome and New Orleans Convention Center.
Rather than help low-income people achieve greater mobility, New Orleans transportation planners decided years ago that their highest priority was to provide heavily subsidized streetcar rides for tourists.
These tourist lines do nothing to help any local residents except for those who happen to own property along the line. The city was not deterred by table 7.2 on page 8 its own analysis of the Desire line showing that each new rider on this line would cost taxpayers more than $20.
About 26,000 low-income families in New Orleans don't own a car. If all the money spent on New Orleans streetcars from 1985 to the present had been spent instead on helping autoless low-income families achieve mobility, the city would have had more than $6,000 for each such family, enough to buy good used cars for all of them. Add the money the city wanted to spend on the Desire Street streetcar and you have enough to buy a brand-new car for every single autoless low-income family -- not a Lexus or BMW, certainly, but a functional source of transportation that would have allowed them to escape the current disaster.
While I don't think that buying low-income families brand-new cars is the best use of our limited transportation resources, it would produce far greater benefits than building rail transit. Studies have found that unskilled workers who have a car are much more likely to have a job and will earn far more than workers who must depend on transit. That is why numerous social service agencies have begun programs aimed at helping low-income families acquire their first car or maintain an existing one.
Yet when I point out the comparative benefits of providing mobility to low-income people vs. building rail transit lines to suburban areas that already enjoy a high degree of mobility, rail advocates often respond, "We can't let poor people have cars. It would cause too much congestion." Yes, as the Soviet Union discovered, poverty is one way to prevent congestion.
New Orleans is in many ways a model for smart growth: high densities, low rates of auto ownership, investments in rail transit. This proved to be its downfall. While the city was vulnerable from being built below sea level, many cities above sea level have proven equally vulnerable to storms and flooding. In the end, New Orleans' people suffered primarily because so many lived without autos, thus making them overly dependent on the competence of government planners.
Please feel free to forward or reprint this article with appropriate citation.
You are not the only one who zeroes in on the number of buses floating around without either a driver or passengers, buses that could have been used to evacuate thousands of New Orleaners to higher ground.
But they weren't, so let's concentrate on what this article is attempting to point out, can we?
A full 35% of black households in New Orleans don't own a car. We could ask why and I'm sure there are several reasons that could be given. One of the reasons is that it's too expensive to own a car. Another might be that auto theft is common in New Orleans, so the less you own the less there is to take.
But the reason that Randal O'Toole concentrates on in this article is that many residents feel they don't really need a car. This segment of the population has become dependent on public transportation for getting around.
And public transportation, as good as it may be in New Orleans, cannot and will not replace the good ol' private automobile when it's time to get out of town in a hurry.
This is not blaming the victims but rather is a critique of the urban environment in which they live, one that encourages dependency and stifles individual initiative.
Note the major investments New Orleans has made over the past 20 years to run trolleys on Canal Street, with plans to also resurrect the Desire line. Tourists may like it, but how much do these streetcars help those who have to rely on public transportation? It's doubtful they helped much in evacuating the city prior to the hurricane's arrival last Monday.
If you consider all the factors - below sea-level location, inadequate levees/canals/pumping stations, poorly functioning public transportation, police getting a sudden case of blue flu - along with an apparent inability on the part of civic authorities to get the word out to all residents that this was a severe storm about to hit - it's a miracle that those without cars of their own survived at all.
No, I didn't need to follow the link. It's been posted at least a half-dozen times in the past week, along with the conflicting stories about the governor declaring a state of emergency or not declaring a state of emergency.
I don't disagree that things could have been managed a whole lot better. I do have some doubts that a Republican mayor (does New Orleans have any Republicans?) might have behaved very much differently, other than not insulting the President.
Forget the buses for a moment and think about the "big picture" if you can.
Large cities such as New Orleans have a considerable portion of the population that's become dependent on what is euphemistically called "public transportation." When that public transportation fails, as in an emergency, these people are stuck unless they can hitch a ride with a neighbor or someone.
I've relied on public transportation myself, although not willingly. It sucks, really sucks. Maybe it's better where you live, but I kind of doubt it. If I didn't have a car to get around in, I'd seriously consider buying one. But apparently a good number of New Orleans residents are happy without one, many more than are in poverty if this article is correct.
Now, is this a worrisome situation? I think so.
I felt that the whole ordeal in New Orleans showed the value of owning a gun.
Cars and guns are necessary equipment to survive in a city (or in the country, for that matter).
Unlike in Tennessee Williams time, any white person that would ride "A Streetcar Named Desire" would have to have a death wish.
But apparently a good number of New Orleans residents are happy without one, many more than are in poverty if this article is correct.
Now, is this a worrisome situation? I think so.
/////////////////
I lived in NYC for almost 20 years. Like everyone else who has ever lived in a big city I recognized those people as people from the projects. Those are HUD (Dept of Housing and Urban Development)buildings. Their housing is subsidized and they collect welfare. And they collect preditors too who go back and forth from jail. The woman are almost 100% unmarried. None in the pictures on tv show people who are skinny with hunger. All are fat and the women have plenty of children but no husbands.
They're all creatures of the welfare state. Your kind of kindness will always murder people. Try doing stuff that doesn't include professional kindness. The results you get have a better chance of being what you intend.
I'm about ready to give up on you.
First you skip the article and get hung up on the number of buses sitting around unoccupied. Then you complain about the Democrat mayor and the Democrat governor not doing their job.
Now you imply that I would coddle the fat, dumb and lazy.
That's not what this article is about, comprehende?
My sympathy for your enduring NYC for nearly 20 years.
Don't forget the buses that weren't used.
(The article is about the lack of transportation.)
Good grief.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.