DonationCoder.com Forum

Main Area and Open Discussion => Living Room => Topic started by: SKA on October 31, 2012, 02:06 AM

Title: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: SKA on October 31, 2012, 02:06 AM
Is Philadelphia safe ie. any looting, unsafe incidents reported ?

Thanks

Ska
Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: J-Mac on October 31, 2012, 11:35 AM
Nope. Other than the usual looting and unsafe incidents, of course.

Actually all we got was high winds and less than 3" of rain. Didn't stop the mayor from appearing on network TV about every hour to warn us about the upcoming apocalypse (Sandy). And the local news providing "Hurricane coverage" round the clock for two days, insisting that the bad stuff was really, really coming soon. They were soooo disappointed!

Jim
Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: mouser on October 31, 2012, 11:45 AM
Can we make this thread a general hurricaine Sandy discussion thread?

My father is in NYC (lower manhattan) and still without power -- but is taking it in stride and says no big deal.

DC member app is in New Jersey (but not too close to shore) and has been offline since it hit.
Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: J-Mac on October 31, 2012, 12:07 PM
Sure - OK by me!

Thanks!

Jim
Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Stoic Joker on October 31, 2012, 12:11 PM
I received an email from EarthLink Business outlining how throughly they were preparing for Sandy's arrival, the day after Sandy left. :huh: ...Just in the nick of to late there guys.  ;)
Title: Hurricane Sandy in the context of the phenomena of hurricanes in general.
Post by: IainB on October 31, 2012, 05:59 PM
(@SKA: I wonder if you could correct the title of the OP to read Hurricane... - i.e. not the "...caine" ending?)

There's a really interesting and informative post about H-Sandy in the context of the phenomena of hurricanes in general, on a climate scientist's blog (Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. (https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/)) - “Hurricanes: Their Nature And Impacts On Society” Published In 1997 By Pielke Jr. and Pielke Sr. Available As A PDF
(The post is copied below including typos and the embedded hyperlink to the .PDF file.)
Our book Pielke, R.A., Jr. and R.A. Pielke, Sr., 1997: Hurricanes: Their nature and impacts on society (https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://pielkeclimatesci.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/b-11.pdf). John Wiley and Sons, England, 279 pp. is available as a pdf. The material is not updated for more recent storms (since 1997) but the recommendations and information on tropical cyclones may useful in the discussion of the impacts of Sandy. Of particular interest related to such late season hurricanes is the text on Hurricane Hazel (1954) where we wrote that
   Hazel joined with another storm system to devastate inland communities from Virginia to Ontario, Canada. Washington, DC experienced its strongest winds ever recorded……..In 1954, Hurricane Hazel…..underwent a similar rapid acceleration to a speed of 60 mph (27 meters per second), as strong south to southwesterly winds developed to the west of the storm. Hazel crossed the North Carolina coastline at 9:25 am on 15 October, and reached Toronto, Canada only 14 hours later where it resulted in 80 deaths (Joe et al. 1995). At that time, it was the most destructive hurricane to reach the North Carolina coast. Every fishing pier was destroyed over a distance of 170 miles (270 km) from Myrtle Beach, South Carolina to Cedar Island, North Carolina. All traces of civilization were practically annihilated at the immediate waterfront between Cape Fear and the South Carolina state line.
__________________
We reported that
   “….tropical cyclones can become absorbed into developing mid-latitude storms thereby infusing added moisture and wind energy from the tropical cyclone and resulting in a more intense mid-latitude storm than otherwise would occur.
__________________
Clearly, this later behavior is what made Sandy a much stronger storm than either a mid-latitude or hurricane would have been separately. In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane. It also tracked towards the west as it interacted with the developing mid-latitude storm rather than accelerating northward as Hazel did.  This resulted in the large fetch of easterly and southeasterly winds into northern New Jersey, Long Island and New Your City which produced the large storm surge.

Our book also discusses the impacts of tropical cyclones which includes extreme winds, storm surge, tornadoes, flash flooding and riverine (i.e. large river) flooding. The analysis has yet to be completed, but I suspect that storm surge will attributed, by far, to  largest economic damage.

Also, with a storm of this magnitude, the National Hurricane Center, the National Center for Environmental Prediction, the media and public officials must be recognized and commended for their early warming. This has resulted in a much lower loss of life than would have otherwise occurred.

Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: TaoPhoenix on October 31, 2012, 06:16 PM
Vague Sentence alert: "In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane." - In what context was Sandy not a Hurricane? When it intercepted the second front?
Title: Hurricane Sandy - relative size to previous hurricanes.
Post by: IainB on October 31, 2012, 06:20 PM
Following on from my comment above, Roger Pielke Sr. has more posts about H-Sandy and other hurricanes on his blog. One of them: The Size Of Hurricane Sandy – How Does It Compare? (http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/16873/)
There are embedded images and links in his blog, so it is probably best to read them directly via the link, but here are two interesting extracts:
Title: Planning, hurricane risk mitigation, and civil defense preparedness/response.
Post by: IainB on October 31, 2012, 07:46 PM
Some years ago, I was assigned to manage a project to develop a functional BCP (Business Continuity Plan) for a major Australian-owned bank based in New Zealand. The BCP had to be aligned with the stringent BCP standards mandated by the Australian parent. Being volcano-prone, earthquake-prone and tsunami-prone as an island on the "Pacific Rim of Fire", NZ already had/has a well-established MCD (Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management) (http://www.civildefence.govt.nz/).
We collaborated closely with the MCD in developing the BCP, and during the course of that collaboration I learned how well-prepared NZ MCD was for naturally-occurring disastrous events. The level of preparedness was very impressive. For example, for years now, things like mandatory building standards have taken into account the need for buildings to behave in a certain manner for maximum safety, in the event of an earthquake tremor. These standards are constantly being improved and lessons are being learned even now from investigations/reviews of the outcomes of past disastrous events - e.g., things like the recent Christchurch earthquake(s).
Things could always be improved, and will be, but I think that the current level of planning and preparedness is quite impressive anyway.

My curiosity was thus sparked by the two underlined comments by Roger Pielke Snr. (quoted in the thread above):

On the second point: I cannot imagine under what circumstances any civil defence responsibility could justify being negligent in not having adequate and effective land-use planning already in place. This when you have known for years (QED Pielke's book Hurricanes: Their nature and impacts on society (https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://pielkeclimatesci.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/b-11.pdf)) that hurricanes are going to come rolling inland off the sea with some kind of monotonous cyclical, clockwork regularity, and that land-use planning would make a significant difference to risk mitigation/avoidance. The mind boggles.

On the first point: H-Sandy seems to have been used as a political opportunity. What I have read from various blogs and news outlets is that FEMA was apparently an actual/potential component of the effective response, and yet FEMA appears to be being used as a political football - e.g., FEMA: Did Mitt Call for its Abolition? And Why Does Barack Want to Cut Its Funding? (http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/31/hurricane-sandy-is-a-case-study-in-the-e)
I cannot conceive of a natural disaster being used as a political opportunity, or civil defence being so cynically used as a political football, in little old NZ. However, I can understand why it might be politically expedient to so use it in the cut-throat politics of the US - though it seems to show an apparently acceptable, cynical and callous disregard for and indifference to human endangerment and suffering, by the Executive, the Administration, and others.
Regardless, I gather that Obama has seemed to come over as "quite presidential" in his handling of the H-Sandy opportunity, whereas the same opportunity has left Romney looking a bit weak after his "Abolish FEMA".

One wonders what might have occurred had H-Sandy not so conveniently eventuated around election-time, and whether the politicians and their mouthpieces in the MSM would have encouraged anyone to give a damn about the human victims of the hurricane.
[/Rant]
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: SKA on October 31, 2012, 10:21 PM
http://www.infowars.com/congressman-wants-12-billion-for-fema-and-sandy-added-to-national-debt/
http://www.infowars.com/nyt-on-hurricane-sandy-were-doomed-without-fema-and-big-government/

from second link above:
"A 1992 study by the Cox Newspapers Group found that during 1982-1992 FEMA’s budgets included only $243 million for disaster relief but $2.9 billion for black ops, according to Harry Helms, author of Inside the Shadow Government: National Emergencies and the Cult of Secrecy.
 
“Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not even created under Constitutional law by the Congress,” writes Harry V. Martin."

Ska
Title: Re: Hurricaine Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: J-Mac on October 31, 2012, 10:21 PM
Vague Sentence alert: "In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane." - In what context was Sandy not a Hurricane? When it intercepted the second front?
-TaoPhoenix (October 31, 2012, 06:16 PM)

I think you might have misread that. It didn't say it wasn’t a hurricane; it said it wasn’t as strong a hurricane.    :)

Jim
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: SKA on October 31, 2012, 10:25 PM
Wave of looting and theft takes hold in areas hardest hit by superstorm Sandy
http://www.naturalnews.com/037773_looting_superstorm_Sandy_theft.html

Ska
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: J-Mac on October 31, 2012, 10:28 PM
My family and I were one mile from where Hurricane Andrew made landfall in 1992, and within the north eye wall. 164 mph sustained winds and a gust measured at 212 mph. It was unbelievably powerful and resulted in some things that I didn't think were even possible or within the laws of physics. Scariest night of my life, including my service in Vietnam. FEMA was completely invisible. I never saw a trailer or vehicle from FEMA. Red Cross was in and out so fast it made me dizzy! To be honest, The Salvation Army gained my eternal respect and support; they set up locations that were kept open and staffed for a few years, continually drove around providing fresh water, food, and clothing, and even offered help with pets.

No sign of FEMA however.

Jim
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: TaoPhoenix on November 01, 2012, 02:30 AM
Vague Sentence alert: "In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane." - In what context was Sandy not a Hurricane? When it intercepted the second front?
-TaoPhoenix (October 31, 2012, 06:16 PM)

I think you might have misread that. It didn't say it wasn’t a hurricane; it said it wasn’t as strong a hurricane.    :)

Jim
-J-Mac (October 31, 2012, 10:21 PM)

Now I'm even more lost!  :huh:  Saying it is not as strong as a hurricane is the same thing as saying it wasn't one, right? How can it simultaneously be a hurricane and not as strong as one?
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 01, 2012, 03:56 AM
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Back from my vacation to the 19th century. It was kind of fun! Played a LOT of board games with the family.

We had enough fun that we are going to institute a weekly family board game night.

My daughter went to sleep before the power was restored, so she doesn't know she is going to wake up back in the 21st century.

Also discovered that popovers (http://allrecipes.com/recipe/popovers/) are the perfect low fat baked item for making during an extended blackout. They come out best when you use room temperature eggs and room temperature milk, both of which can be mixed up with powdered versions and your stored bottled water.  ;)

As far as damage goes, my town still has a lot of downed power lines and there was quite a bit of flooding down by the river. A few people I know will be out of a job indefinitely due to their place of employment being severely damaged. And one friend had an unspecified amount of damage done to his home, when a large tree fell on it.

We were originally quoted as Monday being the date of power restoration for us, but really happy that it is back on 5 days ahead of schedule.

Really glad I was prepared for this, packed the freezer and fridge full of bottles of water, and loaded cans of fruit in the fridge to take up as much of the empty space as possible, when I ran out of bottles. There was enough large "blocks" of ice in my freezer that even though I was without power for 2 days, and opened the freezer a few times to check on things, not even the ice in the ice cube trays melted and the ice cream remained firm.

Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Ath on November 01, 2012, 04:14 AM
Great to see you back on-line, April! :up:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Carol Haynes on November 01, 2012, 05:05 AM
Glad you survived your time trip, April- and in style  :-* So sorry for all the devastation surrounding your town but life and health are more important than things! (I suppose that is easy for me to say though - don't wish to sound glib).
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: mouser on November 01, 2012, 05:37 AM
Welcome back app!  So glad to hear you weathered the storm.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: J-Mac on November 01, 2012, 05:57 AM
Vague Sentence alert: "In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane." - In what context was Sandy not a Hurricane? When it intercepted the second front?
-TaoPhoenix (October 31, 2012, 06:16 PM)

I think you might have misread that. It didn't say it wasn’t a hurricane; it said it wasn’t as strong a hurricane.    :)

Jim
-J-Mac (October 31, 2012, 10:21 PM)

Now I'm even more lost!  :huh:  Saying it is not as strong as a hurricane is the same thing as saying it wasn't one, right? How can it simultaneously be a hurricane and not as strong as one?
-TaoPhoenix (November 01, 2012, 02:30 AM)

No - not nearly the same. You need to look up definitions of hurricanes and strengths!

Jim
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: tomos on November 01, 2012, 06:50 AM
Yaah App,
welcome back :D

The 19th century doesnt sound half bad, I'm trying to get away from the net evenings myself - life seems so much more enjoyable then :-[
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: tomos on November 01, 2012, 06:53 AM
@Tao -
I think you're missing the important 'as' in that sentence:

"In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane."
that equals:
Sandy was not as strong a hurricane as Hazel.
-
Which means that they were both hurricanes - but Hazel was stronger.

Geddit :tellme:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 01, 2012, 07:40 AM
We have grid and net again. After three and a half days with everything off, the house now seems noisy and hot. How quickly we adapt! ;D

Of course there always has to be some wrinkle to make it uniquely Connecticut.

This time it's Bill Finch, the mayor of Bridgeport ("The Park City"), our lovely neighboring post-industrial community, who made a public statement yesterday blaming the power utilities for favoring the surrounding "wealthier" communities when restoring power. This has neatly turned the ongoing outages into a class warfare issue. Hardly surprising since Bridgeport politicians have been spinning that line since the 80s. Point the finger outside - always outside - the city's borders. It plays well with certain constituencies they answer to.

Unfortunately, with schools closed, there are large numbers of kids out roaming the streets yesterday and today. And it's Halloween week. And now it looks like Mr. Finch may have kicked the proverbial hornet's nest...

Spoiler
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (WTNH) -- Mayor Bill Finch says UI is ignoring Bridgeport because people who live there aren't as wealthy as other cities and towns in Fairfield county.

"I don't feel we're getting our fair share from UI," said Mayor Finch. "I drive around my city and I see very few crews."

The frustrated Mayor says the city's children and low income residents cannot afford to go long without power.

"The critical needs of the region and the critical needs of the poorest people in the region are here and they need extra help," said Mayor Finch.

"We're all really struggling and this makes it worse because we have to throw food away, we're in the dark, some people don't have candles or flashlights because they can't afford it," said Tonya Shelton.

"Can you afford to get new food," asked News 8's Ali Reed.

"Of course not," Shelton replied, "they give me $32 a month for food stamps."

She's worried people will get desperate. Police and the National Guard are out monitoring the streets to prevent looting.

"We don't have anything," said Sylvia Campos.

"Do you have the money to go out and get new food," Reed asked.

"No. No, we are like homeless," said Campos.

A United Illuminating spokesman tells News 8 that "no one is given preferential treatment. Every city and town we service gets to put together a list of 10 priorities they feel should be the first places to have power restored."

The Mayor says his top priority is getting power back to the schools so students can get back into the classroom.
-Story in case you're interested


My GF works for the state's social services department. Word from her office is the mood is very ugly in the reception area today...

So it goes. :-\
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 01, 2012, 07:52 AM
This time it's Bill Finch, the mayor of Bridgeport ("The Park City"), our lovely neighboring post-industrial city, who made a public statement yesterday blaming the power utilities for favoring the surrounding "wealthier" communities when restoring power. This has neatly turned the ongoing outages into a class warfare issue. Hardly surprising since Bridgeport politicians have been spinning that line since the 80s. Point the finger outside - always outside - the city's borders. It plays well with certain constituencies they answer to.
-40hz (November 01, 2012, 07:40 AM)

Oh! I know about that game! I heard it somewhere else... where was it? Oh, yeah. Here:



Very brief prediction for the near future
Watch very carefully over the next few days & weeks. We will have the politicians/think tanks come out with "solutions". Each and every one will strip just a little more freedom away... just a little bit... ever so "tiny"... because we all want to be "safe", right?

Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 01, 2012, 09:31 AM
@Ren - re: above prediction - you nailed it I think.  ;D

Ok...now off to see if any new supplies are available after I check up on the elderly couple living next door. Last time this happened we got power back after 5 days, only to lose it 12 hours later when some transformers blew, and then be out for two more days...

Onward! :Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: TaoPhoenix on November 01, 2012, 12:35 PM
@Tao -
I think you're missing the important 'as' in that sentence:

"In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane."
that equals:
Sandy was not as strong a hurricane as Hazel.
-
Which means that they were both hurricanes - but Hazel was stronger.

Geddit :tellme:

-tomos (November 01, 2012, 06:53 AM)

Oh my gawd, you're right. My mind played an awful Halloween trick on me! : (  Once I'm actually reading the sentence that is actually there, I agree with you. Sorry everyone for the fuss.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 01, 2012, 01:56 PM
Storms like this tend to bring out the best in some people and the worst in others.

There was stories of people having their generators stolen before the storm even hit, and sightings of Craigslist ads selling generators worth about $500 new, jacked up to as much as $2000. Also stories about criminals posing as utility workers, knocking on people's doors, tricking them into letting them in and then robbing them.

There is a local curfew here, to help prevent looting and robberies.

They DID give preferential treatment when restoring power to various neighborhoods around here, and continue to, but for VERY GOOD reasons. They restored parts of towns that were considered more important than others. Anybody that lived very close to a hospital were among the first to get their power restored. Hospitals have backup generators, but they can't run them forever. They were given top priority to get them back on the grid. This was followed by major chain drug stores, where people need to fill vital prescriptions, like Wallgreens (which also sells food, batteries, candles, ice, etc.), then supermarkets, some gas stations, convenience stores like 7-11, Quick Check, libraries (they have internet, too), etc. Residential service in general isn't a priority, and only gets restored as a result of something else important in the neighborhood needing to be restored.

The poorest of the poor were kind of taken care of before the storm hit. Most church run food pantries in my area were giving out bags of canned goods and other nonperishables, the weekend before the storm hit.

Another thing that seems to be popular here is businesses with power advertising the fact and allowing people to come in and charge their laptops and cell phones, for free. In addition to Wallgreens doing it (no purchase necessary), there is a nearby Thai restaurant telling people to come on in and charge their electronics, while they enjoy their meal.

Wallgreens had a "buy one, get one free" sale on big jar candles, as soon as they could open again.

And if the power outage continued longer, I would have found myself cooking 10 lbs of chicken legs and sharing the leftovers with my neighbors in my building, due to not being able to properly store them without electricity.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 01, 2012, 02:21 PM
They DID give preferential treatment when restoring power to various neighborhoods around here, and continue to, but for VERY GOOD reasons. They restored parts of towns that were considered more important than others.
-app103 (November 01, 2012, 01:56 PM)

As did our local utility here despite the allegations of one toady mayor.

There is a fundamental difference between setting priorities and what is irresponsibly referred to as "discriminatory" behavior.

Unfortunately, in our current "gimmee" culture, some people will routinely have trouble understanding the difference.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 01, 2012, 02:27 PM
Unfortunately, in our current "gimmee" culture, some people will routinely have trouble understanding the difference.
-40hz (November 01, 2012, 02:21 PM)

And that falls right into what I said about bringing out the best in some people and the worst in others.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: wraith808 on November 01, 2012, 02:39 PM
Unfortunately, in our current "gimmee" culture, some people will routinely have trouble understanding the difference.
-40hz (November 01, 2012, 02:21 PM)

And that falls right into what I said about bringing out the best in some people and the worst in others.
-app103 (November 01, 2012, 02:27 PM)

Very much so. And glad to see that you and 40 are back online and ok.  :Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 02, 2012, 09:04 PM
Ok...these are the three last things I want to say about Hurricane Sandy in CT:

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

1. We still ain't ready worth a damn.

Despite assurances by those in power, and tens of billions spent on "preparedness" and "homeland security." the Northeastern United States still remains unable to effectively deal with even a moderate regional emergency. I shudder to think what a repeat of a natural disaster on the scale of Katrina would do to this area.




[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

2. Voluntarism during emergencies may become a thing of the past.

After hearing about the plight of the elderly people who were being sheltered in her town's Senior Center, my sister thought it might be nice to bring them some homemade cookies since she (to her amazement) had power restored while most of her town was still out. She got up at 6:00am and spent a few hours making over six dozen cookies, which she then brought over to the Senior Center. However, when she got there, the prissy town bureaucrat in charge declined to accept them - or let her hand them out - because the shelter was "dealing with the general public" and my sister's cookies were "privately made."

She then unhelpfully suggested my sister bring them over to the volunteer fire department building about a mile away. "They'll probably take them," she was told. So my sister did - only to find the firehouse locked up - and nobody home.

This afternoon, she and I consumed about two dozen of her cookies while we talked about her morning over a pot of coffee.

My sister's conclusion: "Never again." :-\



[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

3. You can't expect rational or responsible behavior from some elected officials when the chips are down.

Read this story (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/02/bridgeport-utility-workers-report-having-objects-thrown-at-them-by-residents/) about how utility crews were being subjected to abuse in the wake of a city mayor accusing the utility of having a policy to restore power to the "wealthier" surrounding communities ahead of the "poorer people" in his city.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 02, 2012, 10:01 PM
1. We still ain't ready worth a damn.
-40hz (November 02, 2012, 09:04 PM)


Seems to me that there are a few areas that contribute to the problem. The major 2 that I see are the way society is structured (e.g. How can you possibly prepare much when you live in a rathole apartment building?), and people not preparing (in large part because of the structure of society). The reliance on "the state" to take care of people is pretty much delusional.


2. Voluntarism during emergencies may become a thing of the past.
-40hz (November 02, 2012, 09:04 PM)


I hope not. But this points out "state worship" and how people expect the state to "take care of them". Of course YOU can't take care of yourself. Only the state can! Cookies? They're not good enough unless they were purchased with money stolen taxed from honest people and came from a factory using the cheapest possible ingredients available...


3. You can't expect rational or responsible behavior from some elected officials when the chips are down.
-40hz (November 02, 2012, 09:04 PM)


Sigh... Yep. Unless you count them "not letting a good crisis go to waste" as rational or responsible. :(
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: vrgrrl on November 02, 2012, 10:13 PM
We just went out of state to Michigan for the weekend -- we are still without power as of this morning. Our power company says that we *may* get power back by the 15th...or the 11th...or the 15th...we are in one of those little towns on the Hudson in the NYC suburbs that is likely last on the list of importance. I really don't want to go back to no power but I'm afraid that's what we're looking at...
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 04, 2012, 07:48 AM
@Ren - re: above prediction - you nailed it I think.  ;D
-40hz (November 01, 2012, 09:31 AM)

http://thetimes-tribune.com/opinion/w-b-ponders-martial-law-1.1396770

:(

Even the thought...
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: TaoPhoenix on November 04, 2012, 09:54 AM
@Ren - re: above prediction - you nailed it I think.  ;D
-40hz (November 01, 2012, 09:31 AM)
http://thetimes-tribune.com/opinion/w-b-ponders-martial-law-1.1396770
:(
Even the thought...
-Renegade (November 04, 2012, 07:48 AM)

Good for the mayor having a grip. That's almost a fourth tier in our "let's take away civil rights" theme, "police need all that unlimited power to keep you safe in the storm!" I'll say I never expected that even to be a proto-meme.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 04, 2012, 01:34 PM
The reliance on "the state" to take care of people is pretty much delusional.
-Renegade (November 02, 2012, 10:01 PM)

Misguided perhaps. But hardly delusional. Unless they've successfully lowered the public's expectations to the point of where they are now willing to accept such BS as the norm.

I don't.

I demand better, call out their self-serving nonsense for what it is,  and keep pushing for reform.

Like the man says - "If you can't take the heat..."

Nobody is ever forced to run for public office. Or remain in one for that matter.

So I really don't see why we need, for one single minute, to buy into childish or arrogant excuses.

Demand better. Or expect to get what you didn't ask for. :Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: TaoPhoenix on November 04, 2012, 01:50 PM
Because it takes too much effort to bust every single flaw the pol's produce. We shouldn't have to audit every line our politicians say. That's already the wrong path.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 04, 2012, 02:27 PM
Because it takes too much effort to bust every single flaw the pol's produce. We shouldn't have to audit every line our politicians say. That's already the wrong path.
-TaoPhoenix (November 04, 2012, 01:50 PM)

Gotta start somewhere.

The perfect solution is the enemy of a good solution.

My personal approach is to shoot for a 10-15% improvement with each confrontation. That often confuses the opposition (who has by now grown lazy and timid) because they thought they were holding a sinecure rather than an office. Small battles also prevent too much push-back from occurring since that crowd will usually be willing to let something go rather than have to get up and do something. But only as long as they don't feel like too much is being conceded or given up.

So shoot for 10%. Then lock in the gain. Then wait a bit and repeat the process. You often need to wash and rinse a few times before you'll get something really clean. Politics is no different than any other form of dirty laundry in that respect.

By the time they realize what your ultimate game plan is (and really start fighting back) they've already given up enough to have seriously weakened their position. Think artillery barrage first - then send in the marines.

 ;) 8)
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 04, 2012, 04:25 PM
Well, martial law has been declared on the barrier islands of NJ. They are not letting any home owners onto the islands and the National Guard is assisting in a door to door search for survivors and those that were reported missing.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 04, 2012, 07:51 PM
Wow.
FEMA orders two million meals for New York and New Jersey residents starving after Hurricane Sandy (http://www.activistpost.com/2012/11/fema-orders-two-million-meals-for-new.html)
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 04, 2012, 08:04 PM
^^
The solicitation was amended less than four hours later for providers to provide a quote of four million meals, preferably of the self-heating variety.


Meanwhile, goodwill from regular people is rejected at nursing homes...
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 04, 2012, 08:23 PM
^^
The solicitation was amended less than four hours later for providers to provide a quote of four million meals, preferably of the self-heating variety.


Meanwhile, goodwill from regular people is rejected at nursing homes...
-Renegade (November 04, 2012, 08:04 PM)

And senior centers. ;)
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 04, 2012, 10:06 PM
And senior centers. ;)
-40hz (November 04, 2012, 08:23 PM)

Ooops. That too.  :-[
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 05, 2012, 07:23 PM
...Meanwhile, goodwill from regular people is rejected at nursing homes...
-Renegade (November 04, 2012, 08:04 PM)
Yes, but that's not the point. The point seems to be that the State (in the shape of FEMA) will provide disaster relief processes, and the relief itself, or whatever is required in such circumstances.
Good will  - e.g., (say) gifts of tea, biscuits and sympathy - would thus be unnecessary and is to be discouraged. It is not a part of the process and will only confuse the heck out of an otherwise orderly management of things in the midst of chaos.
If the disaster relief - e.g., food - arrived too late such that some people starve to death or become ill before it arrives, then that would be unfortunate.
EDIT 2012-11-07: [/sarc]
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 05, 2012, 08:06 PM
The point seems to be that the State (in the shape of FEMA) will provide disaster relief processes, and the relief itself, or whatever is required in such circumstances.
-IainB (November 05, 2012, 07:23 PM)

That's not the point I get at all living here and seeing FEMA in action.

In the case of NY/NJ I think this particular RFQ was very specifically tailored to make it impossible for anybody other than a previously selected vendor to be able to qualify for the contract. This is how our government sometimes gets around those pesky "open for competitive bid' rules.

MREs are not usually consumed by the American public. And you won't find them except in specialty stores that cater to the survivalist and wilderness expedition trade. So there are relatively few companies that make them. And fewer still that could provide them quickly in multi-million unit quantities.

Maybe this is to help clear out inventory for whoever was providing meals for the US military now that the Iraq/Afghanistan fiasco is winding down. (Wouldn't want them to get stuck with "dead inventory" would we?)

That said, it's encouraging that somebody has at least thought about feeding very large numbers of US citizens on short notice following a disaster. Because our track record has been pretty spotty on that score. Imperfect as this current action by FEMA may be, it's still a small step in the right direction.

It is not a part of the process and will only confuse the heck out of an otherwise orderly management of things in the midst of chaos.
-IainB (November 05, 2012, 07:23 PM)

FWIW, FEMA has seldom been very effective during the most critical early stages of disaster relief. They're much more effective in arranging loans for rebuilding after the body bags and portatoilets have been removed and electricity has been restored.

Maybe it's different in other parts of the world, but based on the natural disasters I've lived through, there is little "orderly management" in evidence during most US relief efforts. And most of the truly effective relief actions always seem to come more from private and small local government efforts than they do from behemoths like FEMA.

If the disaster relief - e.g., food - arrived too late such that some people starve to death or become ill before it arrives, then that would be unfortunate.
-IainB (November 05, 2012, 07:23 PM)

Um...it would be quite a bit more than "unfortunate." Something like that would be utterly unacceptable to the American public. To say nothing of it being political suicide for whoever was in charge were something like that to happen.

It's often been said the George Bush Sr. lost any hope for reelection due the tardy and disorganized mobilization of relief efforts (http://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/28/us/hurricane-andrew-bush-sending-army-to-florida-amid-criticism-of-relief-effort.html) following Hurricane Andrew in 1992.

I tend to agree.

Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: cmpm on November 05, 2012, 10:04 PM
Not only Andrew, but Katrina as well.
They should have ordered emergency supplies before it hit.
It's not like they didn't see it coming.
Louisiana, for the most part, knew they would not get much real help.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=79626&src=eorss-iotd

idiots are blind by choice
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on November 06, 2012, 07:07 AM
The MRE thing reminds me of MRUs, but also of a serious problem with how society is currently structured...

In the 1980's, we had all kinds of bothersome business intellectuals blathering on about "just in time" manufacturing and warehousing and all kinds of stuff. Great. Now we have a situation where if there is any kind of a hiccup in the system, everything shuts down. No reserves. No stockpiles. Not enough to last more than a few hours/days. Brilliant. Well done. We've thrown out the idea that the little squirrel was probably pretty smart when he stockpiled food for the winter, and decided that the squirrel is wasting valuable storage space that could be rented out for paper money that's worth less than what it is printed on. It's a systemic problem. My description there is of a symptom of the problem - it is not the problem itself - so I'm not interested in debating warehousing and logistics strategies - just a quick note there so that the problem doesn't get derailed because of the symptom. (I've not outlined the problem yet - and won't -- it's too time consuming at the moment.)

Then, we have people crammed into tiny subsections of tall boxes. There's zero chance of any of these people being able to feed themselves - they are reliant on a system that continues to show its cracks - they are reliant on that cracked system to feed and clothe them. Even if they are capable otherwise, they don't have access to the resources to do so, i.e. land/space/water/etc. (I just know someone is going to freak out about this... BTW - that was a fallacy > +1 point if you can identify and name it.)

Then, we have government telling us that if you have enough food in your house to last more than 1 week, you're a terrorist.



http://feralgenius.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/only-terrorists-have-seven-days-worth.html

Lots more references out there for that. I picked 2 at random.

Everything is stacked against people.

That is, unless you want to look into "prepping" or "preppers".


So, we have a society that is geared towards ensuring that people cannot be prepared for a natural disaster, and we have the economy geared towards ensuring that business cannot be prepared for a natural disaster...

And now we're left to rely on the "state"?

Am I alone in seeing this as completely insane?

Or have I not been detailed enough? (I'm being pretty lazy there - hoping people can fill in the blanks intelligently (another fallacy there > +1 more if you can identify and name it) on their own.)
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 06, 2012, 02:30 PM
@40hz: Sorry. I just edited my last comment with the addition of [/sarc] ("sarc off").
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 06, 2012, 04:21 PM
@40hz: Sorry. I just edited my last comment with the addition of [/sarc] ("sarc off").
-IainB (November 06, 2012, 02:30 PM)

@IainB: No offense taken previously. No apology needed now.  :)
My responses were more to clarify the way things actually work around here to someone who might not know. None of that was said to take issue with your comment.

I think we all know you better than that.  :Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: skwire on November 06, 2012, 07:59 PM
"In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong a hurricane."
-tomos (November 01, 2012, 06:53 AM)

Technically, to be proper English, it's missing an "of": "In contrast to Hazel, however, Sandy was not as strong of a hurricane."
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 06, 2012, 09:27 PM
@Renegade: I think your comments point to things that, when looked at impartially, though they may seem to be part of a kind of societal madness, are arguably more likely to have their roots set firmly in what appears to have been socially acceptable practice.
To explain, I have taken the liberty of chopping your comments into what seemed to me like relevant sections, so that I could state my ten penn'orth:
1. Stock in hand: In the 1980's, we had all kinds of bothersome business intellectuals blathering on about "just in time" manufacturing and warehousing and all kinds of stuff. Great. Now we have a situation where if there is any kind of a hiccup in the system, everything shuts down. No reserves. No stockpiles.
2. Urbanisation: Then, we have people crammed into tiny subsections of tall boxes.
3. Silliness: Then, we have government telling us that if you have enough food in your house to last more than 1 week, you're a terrorist.
Everything is stacked against people.
That is, unless you want to look into "prepping" or "preppers".
4. Economic externality: So, we have a society that is geared towards ensuring that people cannot be prepared for a natural disaster, and we have the economy geared towards ensuring that business cannot be prepared for a natural disaster...
And now we're left to rely on the "state"?
-Renegade (November 06, 2012, 07:07 AM)
My explanation:
1. Stock in hand: In accounting for manufacturing, when you hold a stock of something (e.g., stocks of nuts and bolts to be used in an assembly line), it is accounted for in the books of account as an Asset. Stocks are unproductive assets - locked up financial value - waiting to be put to productive use. Cost-efficiency (and profitability) dictates that you maintain stock levels as efficiently as possible, so you must avoid over-stocking, as this could directly affect financial liquidity and actual interest or notional use-of-money costs. The foreman's experience and queuing theory would generally help to determine what stock levels you need to maintain to be able to meet production deadlines/throughput, without having production delays - e.g., if you run empty of the stock and have to stop production whilst you wait for new stocks to be ordered and delivered. So you must not under-stock either, as this will adversely and directly affect revenue/profitability.
Stock control software thus relies on the sophisticated application of good stochastic method and even LP (linear programming) to solve the complex problem of optimising stocks for dual objectives - cost-effectiveness and production effectiveness. Tricky.

As I recall it, JIT or "Just In Time" manufacturing was somehow going to magically fix this. It came out of a theoretically ideal concept of automated manufacturing "cells", which modular concept I first came across in 1980 whilst working at CDC on CAD/CAM and NC software developments. The idea of these "cells" was that if you decomposed your production processes to the state where you had production/process cells that did just one or two things, each having an input end (manufacturing materials input) and an output end (manufactured materials produced), then by arranging them appropriately you could get a series of them to produce (say) sausages, and then by rearranging them differently you might have them producing (say) aircraft.
The concept relied on inputs arriving just at the appropriate time they were required for inclusion in the manufacturing process in each cell, thereby eliminating the need for stocking the materials (this was a theoretical ideal, remember).

The concept worked fine in practice in the case of the automation of the flow/control of electrons - as in transistorised circuitry components - e.g., a very useful cell was/is the 555 timer that is to be found in practically any electronic circuit that you come across.
However, the concept did not seem to work terribly well in other cases, and no-one quite knew why. Even if they didn't (couldn't) understand what it really meant, the term "JIT" became a shibboleth that management had to use in every 5th sentence they spoke or wrote, just so that their colleagues would recognise that they were on "their" team. If you didn't use the term, you must be on the "others' " side - not one of "the management team", anyway. It became a necessary term for protective colouration and survival in management. It thus became a management cliché (BS, buzzword), similar to "going forward", "whitespace", "synergistic", "level playing field", "go-to", "vision", "mission", "engagement", etc. Use of such terms in management is mandated for self-survival.

It was about this time (early '80s) that the US seemed to be belatedly recognising their own prophet W.E. Deming, having studiously ignored him for some 20 years previously whilst at the same time praising and marvelling at Japanese manufacturing's prodigious productive efficiency and marketing success (which, hilariously the Japanese manufacturers and engineers have always publicly ascribed to Deming's teachings!). The exemplary dogmatism and intellectual deafness of US business management schools and their inability to learn new things was - and still seems to be - egregious, with Harvard Business School arguably being there steadfastly leading the way back into darkness, most of the time.

Deming's process management approach (which was based on W.A. Shewhart's earlier work on statistical control methods) was quite coincidentally topped-off by a timely bit of what initially seemed to be unrelated theory - Humphrey's Capability Maturity Model (CMM) (http://docs.google.com/open?id=0B9rIby-RfgLNUjc4N09IRmhISlE) (click link to view .PDF file about this). The CMM was described in the book Managing the Software Process (1989). The CMM was conceived by Watts Humphrey, who based it on the earlier work of Phil Crosby. Active development of the model by the SEI (US Dept. of Defence Software Engineering Institute) began in 1986. What the CMM gave was a general model for process capability maturity, and it dovetails beautifully with Deming's work (e.g., Deming's process control chart, the PDSA cycle, and his 14-point philosophy).

So, where you say:
In the 1980's, we had all kinds of bothersome business intellectuals blathering on about "just in time" manufacturing and warehousing and all kinds of stuff. Great. Now we have a situation where if there is any kind of a hiccup in the system, everything shuts down. No reserves. No stockpiles.
- you are describing the reality of institutionalised ignorance of the worst kind - self-inflicted ignorance. That is, we have the full knowledge of how to set up and run all and any of our processes for optimum results, but that knowledge has not been passed on (or taught) to members of society. There are apparently some philosophical and not-invented-here reasons for this, but that could be another discussion in itself.
_______________________________________

2. Urbanisation:
Then, we have people crammed into tiny subsections of tall boxes.
Yes we do, and I gather that censuses show that the urbanised population on the planet numbers larger than the rural population. It used to be the opposite, but that all started to change when the migration from rural areas commenced during the British Industrial Revolution. Now it seems to be largely unavoidable, planetwide. We'll have to adapt to living like this, and I think the evidence is that we have done/are doing quite well in that regard. In the UK and the US they have demonstrated some egregious mistakes/lessons in city planning since the '60s at least, though the UK arguably learned from those lessons and leapfrogged those problems when the plan for the new city of Milton Keynes was drawn up, with council/State housing even embodying the Parker Morris 1961 minimum space standards (http://www.singleaspect.org.uk/pm/index.php) (per the 1961 government report titled Homes for Today and Tomorrow and more commonly known as the Parker Morris standards).
The message here is that we have long held the knowledge to plan and design for pleasant human habitation. Whether we do so plan is another matter.
_______________________________________

3. Silliness:
Then, we have government telling us that if you have enough food in your house to last more than 1 week, you're a terrorist.
Everything is stacked against people.
That is, unless you want to look into "prepping" or "preppers".
If we treat it as given (from the foregoing) that commercial processes are generally likely to be relatively efficient because of the necessary commercial focus on cost-efficiency + production efficiency, then this silliness would seem to be the product of variously inefficient or broken processes operated by the State - i.e., including State and commercial processes that are governed/mandated by statutory/regulatory dictates that are subject to the law of unintended consequences. For example, if you have a government policy of "green energy" that subsidises investement in and building of wind-farm power generation, then you are going to kill an awful lot of fauna (birds and insects), reduce the average cost-efficiency of national power generation, and increase the national/local cost/price of electricity (QED). Oops. We might say that we wouldn't want/expect that all to happen, but it is so obvious and predictable an outcome (and environmentalists and others had been telling us these things all along)  that you might think that only an imbecile would go ahead with it. Oh, but wait...

I would suggest that it's not deliberately "stacked against the people" for it's own sake, so much as the people are the natural and only host to society's parasites - people in government and commercial. It's an economic reality. The fast buck has to be made by someone and extracted from someone else, and it is the consumer/taxpayer who ultimately pays for anything and everything - i.e., the good things and the cockups. Who else could pay? Just as human ignorance/stupidity/greed is the norm, State ignorance/stupidity/greed and corruption is rife and exists in a self-perpetuating cycle, and thus is - and has to be - funded by the consumer/taxpayer.
Presumably, the "preppers" are people who want to extricate themselves from dependency/reliance on the cycle of silliness and ripoff, so that they can peacefully survive the corrupt idiots and their idiotic plans, regardless. But prepping behaviour doesn't necessarily help to fund/perpetuate the lucrative cycle and may even put it at risk, so neither the State nor commercial interests would really want that to happen. Best make it illegal, but if you do, then make it look like it could have been a silly administrative error - but incredibly difficult to reverse now - just in case there's any blowback from their sheeple hosts. The latter will go back to sleep eventually and adapt to it as the new status quo.

_______________________________________

4. Economic externalities:
So, we have a society that is geared towards ensuring that people cannot be prepared for a natural disaster, and we have the economy geared towards ensuring that business cannot be prepared for a natural disaster...
And now we're left to rely on the "state"?
If a disaster is man-made by a commercial organisation - e.g., environmental pollution - then that is usually regarded as an "externality" by the commercial organisation, and very often the costs for clearing the mess up are regarded as society's costs, the commercial operation not accepting responsibility. The taxpayer pays.
The State has no such opportunity to pass on its responsibility for some man-made disaster or aggravation of a disaster that it may have caused. Nevertheless, the outcome is the same -  the costs for clearing the mess up are to society's cost. The taxpayer pays.
 
Regardless, any commercial processes will generally tend to be relatively cost-effective and efficient (as above), but the State-run/managed processes not so much so. If there was profit to be made from being "prepared for a natural disaster", then there would be commercial processes that did that, but civil preparedness - for aggression or defence (war), or for man-made or natural disaster - is traditionally the domain of the State. If the State started to privatise some of these functions/processes, then it might be abrogating the absolute control that it currently wields. So it's not likely to happen.
_______________________________________

On the latter point, I was very impressed with the political astuteness and adroitness demonstrated by the mayor of NY (Bloomberg) when he scored a double-whammy out of the political opportunity presented by Hurricane Sandy. Any responsibility for failure to mitigate the damage or failure to address the humanitarian issues or clear up properly was successfully externalised. You see, the hurricane was an unprecedented event which could thus not have been planned for, and was attributable to CAGW, which Obama had shown he was the Man for sorting out, having promised to push back sea-levels, or something.
This was nothing short of politically brilliant IMHO - albeit cynical and despite crawling with logical fallacy/irrationality:

I'm a Bloomberg fan now.  I reckon he's even Teflon-coated!   :Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 07, 2012, 08:08 AM
Some people rate a blog of their own.

DoCo's IainB rates an entire wiki! ;D :Thmbsup:

Good Lord! That last post is gonna take a little time to read and fully digest.

So ok...I guess I've got my next coffee break planned. ;)


-----

@IainB: thanks for mentioning W.E. Deming. I've pretty much read his entire corpus and found 99% of his thinking spot on. His "seven deadly diseases" of business still rings true despite them being so widely ignored.

The 7 Deadly Diseases
The "Seven Deadly Diseases" include:

    
  • Lack of constancy of purpose
  • Emphasis on short-term profits
  • Evaluation by performance, merit rating, or annual review of performance
  • Mobility of management
  • Running a company on visible figures alone
  • Excessive medical costs
  • Excessive costs of warranty, fueled by lawyers who work for contingency fees

"A Lesser Category of Obstacles" includes

    
  • Neglecting long-range planning
  • Relying on technology to solve problems
  • Seeking examples to follow rather than developing solutions
  • Excuses, such as "our problems are different"
  • Obsolescence in school that management skill can be taught in classes[27]
  • Reliance on quality control departments rather than management, supervisors, managers of purchasing, and production workers
  • Placing blame on workforces who are only responsible for 15% of mistakes where the system designed by management is responsible for 85% of the unintended consequences
  • Relying on quality inspection rather than improving product quality



I had high hopes for a while in the late 80s and early 90s when Deming enjoyed a brief renaissance in US management circles. Unfortunately, that got torpedoed when talk about the so-called "new economy" started gaining traction. That's when many in business started believing in magical worlds where success could be achieved via high expenses, no actual sales, and a work force that did whatever it felt like doing - and where "having pfun" was considered the absolute measure of success.

W.E. Deming (and Eliyahu M. Goldratt) need to be on every would be businessperson's "must read" list

Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 10, 2012, 10:29 AM
Interesting what telling official documents you can dig up with a bit of work...
Army documents offer lessons learned from Hurricane Andrew (https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2012/nov/08/army-documents-offer-lessons-learned-hurricane-and/)
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: IainB on November 17, 2012, 10:45 AM
After all the misinformation and debate about the cause of H-Sandy, it's good to see some certainty - clear and rational truth being spoken by those who know...
http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3637.htm

Who would'a thunk it?     :tellme:
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 17, 2012, 10:59 AM
Who would'a thunk it?     :tellme
-IainB (November 17, 2012, 10:45 AM)

Not me. I know it was an alien plot to meant to mask the departure of that giant submerged UFO 100 miles off the coast of New Jersey. :Thmbsup:

Which kinda explains a lot of things doesn't it? 8)

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 17, 2012, 11:05 AM
I know it was an alien plot to meant to mask the departure of that giant submerged UFO 100 miles off the coast of New Jersey. :Thmbsup:
-40hz (November 17, 2012, 10:59 AM)

Crap! My family left without me!  :o
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: 40hz on November 17, 2012, 12:22 PM
I know it was an alien plot to meant to mask the departure of that giant submerged UFO 100 miles off the coast of New Jersey. :Thmbsup:
-40hz (November 17, 2012, 10:59 AM)

Crap! My family left without me!  :o
-app103 (November 17, 2012, 11:05 AM)

Hush! Don't let anybody know. They left without paying some bills. ;D
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: app103 on November 17, 2012, 05:07 PM
I know it was an alien plot to meant to mask the departure of that giant submerged UFO 100 miles off the coast of New Jersey. :Thmbsup:
-40hz (November 17, 2012, 10:59 AM)

Crap! My family left without me!  :o
-app103 (November 17, 2012, 11:05 AM)

Hush! Don't let anybody know. They left without paying some bills. ;D
-40hz (November 17, 2012, 12:22 PM)

Yes, I know. Most of the bills they forgot to pay were mine.
Title: Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread
Post by: Renegade on December 06, 2012, 07:09 AM
Adding insult to injury... something no self-respecting petty bureaucrat should ever ignore the opportunity for...

VIA (video here)
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/12/nyc-hits-sandy-victims-with-failure-to.html

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/04/new-york-city-hits-sandy-victims-with-failure-to-maintain-property-citation/

Residents in one Queens neighborhood are crying foul after they were written up for failing to clean up the city’s own mess. It is yet another new complication in life after Superstorm Sandy.

Rosanne and Joe Cavaliere are still trying to clean up from the hurricane.

They have branches through their roof, busted front windows, and, to add insult to injury, they recently received a citation notice from the city.

A city tree falls on their house, so, they get a citation... Nicely done!