Nightmare In New Orleans

"In the last 21 years, I've covered big hurricanes, Gilbert, Hugo, and Andrew — the granddaddy of them all. This is it. This is the biggest natural disaster I've ever seen in my two decades of reporting." ~ Kerry Sanders, NBC News Correspondent

Why is this statement true? What factors operated to make this one of the worst natural disasters in U.S. history? As a 13 year old boy I remember heading south to the Miami area with my dad to help rebuild the area after Hurricane Andrew. The devastation was so horrific that it was difficult for my young mind to comprehend. But not once did I see violence or even anger coming from those whose homes and businesses had been destroyed. There was despair and sorrow, but there was also hope.

There was a huge outpouring of private charity and volunteer help. That combined with the efficiency and initiative of private enterprise helped to get the area back on its feet in a matter of months. In New Orleans, it is likely that the rebuilding process won't even begin for months. Reports say that it will be up to six months before they can even get the water out of the streets.

This is obviously the difference between destructive storms like Andrew and the outright chaos and breakdown of civilization occurring in New Orleans. During powerful hurricanes, property is damaged and destroyed and to the extent that they did not evacuate, people's lives are in danger. But this is only the situation for the several hours it takes for the storm to pass. Once it has gone, the danger is largely over. If you survived the storm, you'll most likely be just fine. The case in New Orleans is the exact opposite.

There, the storm passed without being as destructive as many experts predicted. The real danger occurred when the flood waters began pouring into the city, an event which by many accounts didn't become a problem until several hours after the hurricane had passed. The truth is that despite the fact that many were unable or chose not to evacuate, despite the widespread property damage, despite the fact that there are few supplies, this storm would be no different than the many others that have hit the southeast if it weren't for the flooding.

Have we forgotten that last year Florida was pounded by three hurricanes within a matter of weeks? Don't we remember how devastating that was for the people living there? I would wager that for most people, last year's events are just a distant memory. My parents live in that area and were hit by two of those storms and even I had let the whole thing slip to the back of my mind. In hindsight it just doesn't seem like it was that big of a deal. But how can this be? Well, because property damage isn't the end of the world. It's truly amazing how quickly a market system and the graciousness of private charity (if it is allowed to operate unmolested) can rebuild and restore a city.

But this is not the process we see unfolding in New Orleans. The reason for this is that what was once a city is now a lake. People are stranded, not because they can't get out, but because supplies and help can't really get in. The water and the government are making sure of that. Under normal circumstances these people would not be trying to leave, they would be trying to clean up. They would be starting the long process of restoring order and normalcy to their lives. Food, water and aid would have poured into the area and a flood of volunteers from organizations such as the Red Cross and the LDS and other churches would have already arrived and started working. But in this case not only are the "authorities" slow to respond to the crisis, but they are quick to deny access to private parties and to keep people who are in the city from getting out. Consider the following examples.

Over 300 guests are trapped at a Hilton Hotel in New Orleans. The hotel has been providing food and water for their guests and has armed guards stationed outside to keep out looters. As the food and water is running out they arrange to have busses come to shuttle the guests out of town. The busses are turned away by FEMA before reaching the hotel and one of them is commandeered for "government purposes." A woman is driving her SUV through town when it is commandeered by a police officer who tells her that she will not be getting it back. This is in addition to the thousands of people that are under de-facto house arrest in the superdome and at the convention center. These are just a few of the many tales of private citizens and companies being stripped of their property and/or being denied help and freedom of movement.

Seeing the vast difference between this catastrophe and the many other hurricanes that have hit the East coast in recent years we feel a need to point the finger of blame somewhere. Some say that the government didn't respond fast enough, some say that it was merely an act of God and nothing could be done to prevent it. One person interviewed by a CNN reporter said that it was the "invisible hand of capitalism" that was responsible for the plight of those left trapped in the flooded city. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First of all we must ask why is it that hundreds of thousands of people have found themselves living in a city situated below sea level, yet not sufficiently protected from a highly likely disaster such as the one just witnessed? If I wish to build my house on the rim of a highly active volcano, I cannot hold the rest of society responsible if the volcano were to erupt and put me in a dangerous situation. Not only would most people not sympathize with my plight, they would think me a fool. The situation in New Orleans was obviously not as extreme as this but the question still remains. Why are there so many people living in such a precarious situation?

The answer is government. By assuming the responsibility for building "public infrastructure," the government undertook to build and maintain the levees that "protected" the city from flooding. This poses a two-fold problem. First it externalizes the cost of living in a dangerous area, meaning that other people around the country are forced to absorb the costs involved with protecting the city's population and cleaning up after a disaster. Second, since it is government and not private enterprise that builds and maintains the levees, there are no market incentives in place to ensure adequate levels of safety and upkeep. No profit and loss motives are operating to make sure that the levees actually provide a high level of safety, or in the case that they do not, that property owners in the area know this and take personal precaution. Instead, the government builds levees according to its own dictates and driven by its own motives while at the same time providing the illusion of safety that attracts lots of residents to the area.

If a failure occurs, as obviously happened in this case, it is unclear where the blame should be placed and politicians are especially adept at deflecting blame onto other parties. This is what happens when the full costs of a decision are not born by the decision maker but are forced upon others. In the absence of government levees, those who chose to build homes and businesses in New Orleans would have to take into account the risks inherent in such a decision. If no private system of levees could be devised (which is an interesting topic itself,) then each property owner must decide how to best protect his assets. It is likely under these conditions that the costs would outweigh the benefits for many people and they would choose to reside elsewhere. Under these conditions it is highly possible that the city of New Orleans would never have arisen in its current location.

But that is all in the past and nothing can be done about it now. Many have accurately pointed out the futility of dwelling upon such matters since it does not change the fact that New Orleans exists, that it is under serious duress, and that there are lots of people down there who need help. So what's the solution to this problem? Well, it seems evident that is no shortage of private charity to help those in need. The generous giving of so many is truly astounding as it always is in these situations. Just imagine if these same people weren't already being deprived of 50% of their income due to wasteful taxes. But as far as the city of New Orleans goes, I think that the way to prevent further problems is to allow private enterprise to decide whether or not to re-build New Orleans.

If government-built levees did not protect the city this time, and if there is no profit and loss incentive to improve in that regard, how can we ever be sure that they will protect it in the future. If a business fails, investors do not normally throw more money at it. Its failure is a signal of its inefficiency and/or incompetence. With government the opposite is almost always true. If a government project or program fails, the answer is always that we must throw even more money at it in order to fix the problem. Since this will undoubtedly be the case with the levees surrounding the city of New Orleans, we can expect that similar catastrophes await that city in the future. But perhaps even worse, we can be sure that the costs of protecting and subsidizing people who choose to live below sea level will continue to be forced upon the rest of the U.S. population and the number of people who choose to live in the area will under these circumstances always be much greater than would be the case if each of them had to account for the risks involved.

The chance that the government will abandon its goal of protecting the city from future floods with its obviously inadequate dams is zero. Not only is this contrary to the nature of government itself (expansion not contraction,) but politically it is almost impossible. The notion that government should naturally rebuild the city and provide aid for all those whose property was destroyed is almost universal throughout that area. Such is the mentality produced and fostered by the welfare state. Self-sufficiency, personal responsibility, economic calculation and even private charity are crowded out by dependency, entitlement, central planning and government handouts. If we are ever to rid ourselves of the tremendous burden that these forces place on our economy and on civilization itself we must start somewhere. New Orleans seems as good a place to start as any.


Some other good sources for similar viewpoints can be found Here and Here.