Comments on: The time our politicians spend planning for disaster

By: qofdisks

qofdisks — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:38:02 +0000

“The only way to grow more jobs in our state is for state government to provide the rules and regulations that increase productivity in the private sector.”
This is called supply side economics and has been proven not to work. We can produce and be as efficient as all get out but if there is no money to buy then we are no better off. We have had excessive deregulation since Reagan and it has not created a stable or secure economy. We need to try demand side tactics to get this economy going. Hiring gov. workers is the best plan especially in the short term because only the gov. and Wall St. has any money to spend. Wall St. is investing in other countries so that only leaves the gov. to create market demand by creating jobs right now. Jobs pay people money so they can buy from business. After awhile business can start hiring again.

There is no way that El Paso is going to get nuked by Terrorists. The Cartels would not allow some Al Qaida to get to the border because nuking the port of entry for drugs would be bad for business. I suspect that given the bad-a$$es just across our border that any Jihadist would not have the huevos to make a run through Juarez suicidal or not. I don’t see Al Qaida attempting to pass through a red hot Drug War to get to us.
The best disaster plan for this state would be for us to start making and growing our own stuff. We need to defy multi-national corporations by saving seed and producing our own goods here. Produce local, buy local, vote with your dollars.
As far as disasters go, this state is vulnerable to drought, pandemic, national destabilization, quake and environmental degradation. We also have a pretty hot war just one hour’s drive away.

By: Michael Swickard, Ph.D.

Michael Swickard, Ph.D. — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:05:05 +0000

Dr. J – my column really just asks: should we as a community be talking about this?

As to a terror threat… “Well, punk,” snarls Dirty Harry as he sights down the barrel of his .44 mag that is either empty or has one shot left, “Do ya feel lucky?”

By: Dr. J

Dr. J — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:04:26 +0000

Well Dr. Swickard, like buying insurance against a highly improbable, but not impossible, catastrophic event, I would have to know what it would cost me to do this exercise. If it were a few thou and cheap, heck yah, if it costs taxpayers tens or hundreds of millions, no way. Simple risk/reward analysis using conditional probabilities on costs and benefits. And of course since this is our tax money spent by our government, an additional analysis of the opportunity cost of doing this vs. doling other higher priority things would be in order.

By: Michael Swickard, Ph.D.

Michael Swickard, Ph.D. — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 13:13:30 +0000

Dr. J – unless you are a member of the planning group for Al Qaeda you do not know? Further, you are using your Western intellect to try to think like the Near East thinkers in Al Qaeda. I am not saying what they will or will not do because I do not know. Here is what I do know: there are no plans to deal with such a terrorist attack in our area. Are you willing to bet the lives of perhaps a million innocent victims including yourself and your loved ones that you **KNOW** what Al Qaeda will do?

By: Dr. J

Dr. J — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 23:41:12 +0000

Dr. Swickard, do you really think Al Qaeda is interested in bombing El Paso??? Poppycock. Al Qaeda wants to destroy something that gets on the international news and cameras are rolling as it happens with huge casualties. That is why they chose NYC for 9/11. The whole country and world thinks NYC is the center of America’s media, business, and cultural universe. I don ‘t but everybody in NYC does. It is foolishness to think NM, or even Arizona would be a target of some crazed nuclear bomber. I could easily see LA, Chicago, and NYC, but not around our fair area. Actually London or Tokyo would be great targets due to the population density, but ‘Cruces? And then let’s look at your other disasters. Hurricanes, Cat 5? Nope, not in our backyard. How about earthquakes? The Rio Grande Rift is a seismically active area, but not a major plate boundry like CA. or Haiti. Sorry, not scary or probable either. How about a tsunami? Nope. Or a super sized tornado? Maybe, but not too probable either. How about floods, plagues, and pestilence, 40 days and 40 nights kind of real Old Testiment disasters? Nah, not too probable or scary either. So what are we left with? The only thing that mght get me interested is a giant volcanic explosion. There have been numerous ones around our state, but these have many, many warning signs long before they happen, and there are none now. I agree it would be fine for our legislators and government officials to use time to plan for all these things. I would keep them busy and keep them out of my wallet and personal choices and freedoms. That’s OK, just no spending of my money on such foolishness.