More Part-Time Pundit coverage of Hurricane Katrina can be found here.
Now that it seems the evacuation is more or less complete in New Orleans, talk has begun on rebuilding New Orleans. It’ll be rebuilt, hopefully with an above sea level plan, if for no other reason out of American pride. The question I ask is not whether or not to rebuild, but who should do the building.
Off the top, the highly technical aspects of fixing and operating the pumps, elevating the city, repairing the levees and the like should be done by experts. This deals more with rebuilding houses, apartments, stores, and the bulk of the actual structures. As someone who is not a fan of affirmative action, I think the work of the actual building should go to the poor minorities who were displaced.
Yes, they’ll need to be trained and yes it will slow down the process. But let’s look at the alternatives for a second. You have a hundred some odd thousand very angry, upset people who were less than impressed by the overall response to the disaster. And they are upset for good reason. These are people who were beat down and pushed down by “the man” all their lives. Many are unemployed; many are unemployable, because they lack training and education in solid skills. These are the people that are standing around in the tens of thousands at various football fields near you and they’re going to have nothing to do for months while carpetbaggers head to New Orleans to rebuild it.
Instead, I propose letting those who want to make $30-40/hr that are physically capable to go back to New Orleans to build. One, it would help them out financially obviously. Two, they would get bona fide on the job training and experience in building, something they can reuse once the building is done. Three, it would give many of them something to do instead of sitting around a football field waiting for Red Cross to bring them their next meal. Four, and most important, it will help break the cycle of poverty by getting them work and a job skill that can be used even if they never go back to New Orleans. It will help them become self-reliant.
Article comments
1 - RJ
Good idea.
And you left out another positive: Having these folks actually rebuild their own neighborhoods would increase their sense of community and personal ownership, and therefore they would be less likely to look the other way when criminal gangs try to take over the rebuilt streets of New Orleans.
But I'm sure many of these folks would rather just lie around in air conditioning all day and get their free food, medicine, etc. without bothering to actually plan for the future...
2 - thenica lopez
I'm a little upset about how the madia calls the evacuees,refugees they are not refugees they are americans in a time of need. A refugee is someone forgin from another country that the unitde states helps out, not our fellow american men,women,and childern.
3 - Aidan Maconachy
Race isn't the issue here - race is the excuse. America has moved well beyond the polarized antagonisms that gave rise to the riots in the 60's.
Unfortunately there are Democrat "leaders" whose life calling seems to amount to the maintenance and promotion of psychological ghettoization ... "men of God" (ahem!) like Jesse Jackson who compares the black citizens of New Orleans to slaves huddled on a ship.
This mindset is the problem because it creates a culture of victimization that paralyzes pro-active initiative. It makes people feel like crap, so bad that they lose the will to hope and dream.
African Americans like Bill Cosby and Colin Powell see it differently. They are about shaking off the baggage and the stereoypes in order to find empowerment. They are about accepting America and what it has to offer, rather than living in its shadow in a condition of eternal resentment.
No amount of affirmative action, no amount of money, no amount of aid, can help a man who can't or won't help himself. Disenfranchised communities struggling with poverty need to be empowered from within through leadership that takes an energized and positive approach to this question of achievement. All of the tools that can help to make this possible should be provided, but NOT in the form of charity or misplaced favoritism.
Any positive change that will do justice to the spirit of the oppressed has to come from within, as an act of self-empowerment.
4 - Pete Blackwell
Many are unemployed; many are unemployable, because they lack training and education in solid skills.
I think the fact that their entire city was wiped off the map has an awful lot to do with the unemployment levels. Just saying.
5 - Natalie Davis
Oh yeah, unemployment was responsible for Katrina and the subsequent storn surge.
Mr. Bambenek, your idea sounds like one worth considering. There are many paths people could take; this just may be one that should be attempted.
6 - Dan
I think the concept is good, but there is a lot of skill involved in the construction trades. You can integrate one or two guys with the desire to learn into a seasoned crew, but you mostly need guys who've developed the skills over time to direct them.
You could probably plug a lot more guys into the clean-up effort though.
7 - steve
ghettoization...haha never heard it in the form of a verb...LOVE IT. most of the people who were swept away, or the people who managed to float had no skills. The government only like people with skills! so...for that reason...
I hope haliburton rebuilds New Orleans. Im sure they will do a great job.
8 - alethinos59
Bombastic, for ONCE I've got to hand it to you - this isn't a half bad idea on the face of it... I like it. It certainly is worth considering and promoting...
Good going!
alethinos
9 - Dave Nalle
>>I think the fact that their entire city was wiped off the map has an awful lot to do with the unemployment levels. Just saying.<<
Louisiana had one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, and I believe NO had the highest urban unemployment of any city.
This is why so many are staying in Texas which has one of the lowest levels of unemployment in the nation - that suggests they want to work.
And I bet a lot of them will take the opportunity to work on the rebuilding. It doesn't take a lot of specialized skill or experience to hold a 2x4 or hammer carpet tacks. Plus, I believe that groups like Habitat for Humanity provide some basic training for volunteers.
Dave
10 - Abbie Gonzalez
Well, when I clicked the link, I thought this was going to be a post on affirmative action... but it wasn't.
Actually, I agree. If the companies involved in the rebuilding, (but lets not put the government completely in charge) wish to do it, or had an incentive to hire people from the area, its a great idea.
If this turns out to be an affirmative action thing... like we'll hire you just because your from NO, then it is a very bad idea. (I've been on that end of the stick. Its no fun)
11 - Luke
Dan is right, if you leave it entirely up to them they'll be left with a really crappily built city which will decay rapidly, and become more gettoized than it was before, the real answer is a compromise, train them how to built etc etc, but on any one job half the guys doing have to be professional builders who've been doing it for at least 15 years, and one government appointed rich white dude running the crew, but i don't think people would complain too much, when everyone local/foreign/black/white are working to rebuild 'their' city.
most of it will be on the job training, and even then, there's a lot more displaced people than you can supply work to, some will volunteer whatever work they can, but most will simply move to another town, but the positive thing about that is only the black folks who actually give a shit will stay and possibly the white folks who actually give a shit will stay too, anyone who would loot, rape, or kill won't be sticking around for the reconstruction.
12 - Bilbo
RB, I would like to get a hold of you and talk to you more about your opinion.
I agree with you 100%.
13 - Gold
I don't think the idea of putting the displaced people to rebuild is sound. It takes experience to build solid foundations and the proposed idea sounds ultra-chaotic and I don't think would generate much good. So much money would be wasted!!! The best they could do in the name of fairness is to proportionately award rebuilding contracts to Blacks and whites, regardless of where they come from -- locally or imported into the area.
To solve the lack of education and job opportunity, the rebuilding plans should include trade schools and businesses within the communities of those who are lacking. That's all they needed in the first place.....education, training and somewhere to apply the learned skills in exchange for pay.
14 - Reason
"One, it would help them out financially obviously." What about when government money runs out? They could not get a job beforehand?
"Two, they would get bona fide on the job training and experience in building, something they can reuse once the building is done." They could not get experience from minimum wage jobs beforehand?
"Three, it would give many of them something to do instead of sitting around a football field waiting for Red Cross to bring them their next meal." Better to have them do nothing than waste heaps of money and time trying to repair their city.
"Four, and most important, it will help break the cycle of poverty by getting them work and a job skill that can be used even if they never go back to New Orleans. It will help them become self-reliant." Again, they could have before the hurricane via minimum wage jobs. Want to guess why they did not? Well, let's just say, who in their right mind would work when they get free money (ie welfare) for doing nothing. In the parlance of economists, a disincentive to work.
There is no problem with employing such half baked schemes with money from charity or specific individuals, but when government money is being used, officials should strive to use it most efficiently (I know I know, its taboo to use 'efficient' and government in the same sentence). Dont worry though, government money, has and always will be misallocated.
Also, if you really wanted full employment, you sure as hell would not pay 30-40 an hour but minimum wage. If they paid 30-40 an hour, hell, I'd run down there and start working.
"name of fairness" how bout fairness to the taxpayer by achieving the most construction for his dollars?
When there was such affirmative action for contracting, what happened much of the time was that a 'minority' contractor got the contract then immediately sold it off. I've heard them called Ali baba contracts I believe.
Please, keep up the self congratulatory pretensions. I happened upon this blog through google news.
15 - will
just a nice little piece of information the idiot has struck again, he has suspended the davis bacon act which guarantees minimum wage in contracts. In the areas hit the average minimum wage for construction is $9.00 an hour so they will be paid even less than that. If that doesen't piss people off and make you think whether or not race was an issue. You tell me states that are predominately black will soon be working for practically slave wages in in the name of the big corporation. God bless the new America.
16 - DrPat
Shall we do the most we can with the billions and billions earmarked for reconstruction, or shall we be concerned with making sure the unions get their cut?
The quote is from the Sept. 8th Washington Post, which also quotes AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney's sharp criticism of the move.
17 - will
Owe I forgot it's alright to save money buy paying below average wages,it's not just a union thing, real wages have been falling drastically for decades, do the research. but we can give money away to contractors like haliburton. Anyone remember the 8 billion dollars not accounted for in Iraq, of course not, besides we are not worried about that as all of that debt is a direct write-off to future generation. WAKE UP. By the way Bush's tax cut for the elite are estimated to be approx 70 billion dollars, I wonder?
18 - Reason
Minimum wage laws destroy entry level/dead end jobs that the poor so vitally need, as they lack the skills to be paid more. Some people just do not have the skills to be worth $8 an hour, especially teenagers, and even more so black teenagers, who have been especially hurt by the minimum wage. The overriding rule in economics is that any voluntary transaction between two parties is beneficial. Thus, even if wages are 'low' (an arbitrary distinction), they are better than the alternative to no job. Ultimately, the market protects your wages. Most, if not all, of the higher paying jobs are not unionized, and still manage to haul in gobs of cash. Why? Because of the forces enumerated above. Granted, some disciplines benefit from different market distortions, like doctors, who enforce draconian limits on the number of doctors in various ways, but that is thankfully an exception and not the rule.
Employees are protected by their ability to seek employment elsewhere, and employers are protected by their ability to seek other potential hires. Minimum wages benefit unions, as union members are usually skilled, and get paid wages well above minimum wage. However, the minimum wage shrinks or eliminates the incentive of hiring an unskilled/inexperienced worker in return for lower wages, as the wages the employer must pay are higher and it may not be worth it to hire the novice. This benefits unions as there is now a smaller labor pool and unions then do not compete with lowerpaying less skilled employees.
Government largesse in one area does not legimitize it in another, no matter the political orientation of either party responsible. Both are wrong.