Lighten up, Francis.

Follow on Twitter rss

Use Paypal to support us!

«
»

The Hills are Alive

By mistermix July 1st, 2010

Today’s New York Times reports that FEMA trailers have re-appeared in the Gulf as a source of cheap housing for oil spill cleanup workers. Because the trailers were constructed with cheap materials, they have unsafe levels of formaldehyde.

That’s not the only place those things have landed. I’m traveling in the Dakotas and the hills on the reservations are dotted with these things. The GSA says they’re for “recreational use”, but the tribes who received them weren’t told that. They made the reasonable assumption that the government wouldn’t truck trailers from Texas as vacation homes for some of the poorest people in the US.

Share
Posted in The Party of Fiscal Responsibility
This entry was posted on Thursday, July 1st, 2010 at 8:25 am and is filed under The Party of Fiscal Responsibility. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
▲

22 Responses to “The Hills are Alive”



  1. 1 frankdawg Says:

    SEE! They are not so poor! THEY get vacation homes, I work for a living and I can’t afford a vacation home!

    These big bucks are eating T-bone steaks on all those handouts & enjoying a vacation home in the hills while I toil away to put food on my family & get raped by the tax collecting salve master.

    GATHER YOUR ARMIES!


    July 1st, 2010 at 8:36 am



  2. 2 stuckinred Says:

    Concentration camps!


    July 1st, 2010 at 8:46 am



  3. 3 c u n d gulag Says:

    For ‘recreational use?’
    They’re supposed to smoke a FEMA trailer?
    Just don’t inhale, it’ll kill ya…


    July 1st, 2010 at 8:49 am



  4. 4 Catherine D. Says:

    Gee, just slightly more subtle than smallpox infected blankets …


    July 1st, 2010 at 9:17 am



  5. 5 cleek Says:

    The GSA says they’re for “recreational use”, but the tribes who received them weren’t told that.

    that’s not what the article says.

    U.S. General Services Administration officials say the FEMA trailers are intended for recreational use and not for housing.
    ...
    They say tribal officials were made aware of that.


    July 1st, 2010 at 9:23 am



  6. 6 Bella Q Says:

    @Catherine D.:
    My thoughts exactly about the recurrence of historic events. It’s a shandah the way the US government has treated the indigenous people of this continent, from the earliest days through the present.


    July 1st, 2010 at 9:31 am



  7. 7 stuckinred Says:

    @cleek: Stop with the facts please.


    July 1st, 2010 at 9:33 am



  8. 8 matoko_chan Says:

    @Bella Q:

    It’s a shandah the way the US government has treated the indigenous people of this continent, from the earliest days through the present.

    but its the way the US government treats ALL indigenous people. Just look at those rotten ingrate Iraqis and Afghanis. If they would just accept White Jesus into their lives they wouldn’t have to die all the time.
    ;)


    July 1st, 2010 at 10:45 am



  9. 9 Cat Lady Says:

    Those things would be a vast improvement over anything in Rapid City. Just sayin’.


    July 1st, 2010 at 10:46 am



  10. 10 ET Says:

    The US government has a history of giving Native Americans products like blankets that kill them at worse or just make them real sick at best, so somehow this doesn’t come much of a surprise.


    July 1st, 2010 at 12:21 pm



  11. 11 sukabi Says:

    why didn’t FEMA change contractors and insist on safe materials for these trailers they are buying, and get rid of the toxic ones that were used during Katrina? Why after 4 years of knowingly making folks sick are these trailers still being used? And why isn’t anyone doing anything about it besides saying “They’re for recreational use?”... wouldn’t the assumption that anything FEMA sends out for use be safe for you know—actual use.


    July 1st, 2010 at 12:35 pm



  12. 12 Brachiator Says:

    @ET:
    Here is the part of the story that makes my head hurt:

    But federal officials have struggled to figure out what to do with the contaminated trailers, which have cost nearly $130 million a year to store and maintain, according to federal records. As a result, the government decided to sell the trailers in 2006.

    So instead of dismantling these crappy trailers and finding a way to dispose of them responsibly, we got government paper pushers selling the damn things to used car salesmen, who are obviously always to be commended for their honesty and commitment to public safety.

    It pisses me off to no end that anyone is living in these things, whether Native Americans or oil workers who may have already been exposed to toxic chemicals.


    July 1st, 2010 at 1:18 pm



  13. 13 scav Says:

    @Brachiator: Obvious. They’re following the path blazed by bankers, who also aren’t getting rid of (and trying to sell) toxic “assets” — coincidentally, they’re houses in both instances.


    July 1st, 2010 at 1:29 pm



  14. 14 MattR Says:

    Travelling in the Dakotas, eh? make sure to check out the world’s largest Buffalo in Jamestown, ND


    July 1st, 2010 at 1:46 pm



  15. 15 Brachiator Says:

    @scav:

    Obvious. They’re following the path blazed by bankers, who also aren’t getting rid of (and trying to sell) toxic “assets” — coincidentally, they’re houses in both instances.

    No, this is more the stupid part of the government at work, not thinking creatively to avoid a problem. I know that Obama and his folks have a lot on their plate, but the FEMA people should have been thinking about how to dispose of the crappy trailers, not how to store them, and coming up with stupid pseudo-regulations about how much poisoning is acceptable.

    By the way, some people I commute with work for a company that makes batteries for a range of uses, including batteries used in RVs. They noted that because of the downturn in the economy and other reasons, there has been a huuuuuuge plunge in the sale of RVs, trailers, and mobile homes over the past few years.

    I wonder if someone was trying to throw a bone to the industry by allowing the resale of these crappy trailers.

    But no matter the reason, the initial bad decision was in trying to hold onto this stuff instead of just cutting their losses.


    July 1st, 2010 at 2:16 pm



  16. 16 Ruckus Says:

    @Brachiator:
    But no matter the reason, the initial bad decision was in trying to hold onto this stuff instead of just cutting their losses.
    Isn’t that the way a lot (most?) large organizations work? No one in middle or upper management will admit they screwed up, and someone somewhere is in charge of the project. If they take a loss it usually means someone has to fall with the loss. Shit may roll downhill gathering bodies on the way, but when it explodes instead of rolls, everyone gets covered.


    July 1st, 2010 at 3:19 pm



  17. 17 mistermix Says:

    @cleek:

    Cree, who has been researching the concerns with the FEMA travel trailers and FEMA mobile homes for about two months, said he recently accompanied relatives to a lot in Purvis, Miss. He said the lot had about 60 trailers designated for the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, where his relatives obtained a travel trailer and brought it back to the reservation. When his relatives picked up the travel trailer at the lot, he said no documents were presented stating there were possible health concerns and/or health hazards. He said a sticker taped on the side window stated the trailer is not to be used for living in but because of the rain the sticker could easily have fallen off. He said only a few of the trailers had such stickers.

    http://www.minotdailynews.com/.....40592.html


    July 1st, 2010 at 5:15 pm



  18. 18 Garrigus Carraig Says:

    @cleek:

    [U.S. General Services Administration officials] say tribal officials were made aware of that.

    Oh, so it must be true.

    @matoko_chan:

    but its the way the US government treats ALL indigenous people. Just look at those rotten ingrate Iraqis and Afghanis.

    I feel dirty responding to you, but the assertion that the Iraqis are indigenous means you need to reach for a dictionary.


    July 1st, 2010 at 6:02 pm



  19. 19 scav Says:

    @Brachiator:

    But no matter the reason, the initial bad decision was in trying to hold onto this stuff instead of just cutting their losses.

    which is, as best I can tell, what a lot of banks (and other financial self-appointed smartest people in the room) are doing — certainly did. Avoided mark to market like the plague.


    July 1st, 2010 at 9:08 pm



  20. 20 sukabi Says:

    @Garrigus Carraig: they are indigenous to Iraq and Afghanistan respectively….. just as the Aboriginal peoples are indigenous to Australia…. think that’s what he meant… Unless you’re assuming that the current residents of those countries aren’t the original people of those areas…


    July 1st, 2010 at 11:41 pm



  21. 21 Georga Grivois Says:

    To everyone who thinks the FEMA trailers are a good thing,,hahaha..they will poisen anyone who lives in them…check out CDC findings!

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23168160/


    July 2nd, 2010 at 2:27 pm



  22. 22 azure Says:

    It’s more like the feds are following in the footsteps of the chemicals industry (Dow, et al), chemical compounds developed during WWII for chemical warfare became the pesticides, insecticides & herbicides used by corporate agriculture, and home gardeners.

    Agent Orange (2,4,5 T) was sprayed by the Forest Service on national forests & owners of private forest lands in the Pacific Northwest until people who had seen their watersheds & property (spray drift from helicopter spraying) & a substantial increase in human miscarriages & deformed offspring of domestic & wild animals successfully sued to obtain an injunction against spraying of Agent Orange on public forest lands. It wasn’t until the 1980’s that EPA finally suspended registration of 2,4,5T and even later until the last plant manufacturing 2,4,5-T (in New Zealand) was shut down.

    When “shock & awe” was going on in Iraq, one of the few times any one thought they’d found a WMD was when a US soldier felt ill after entering some area. Turned out it was Sarin, which can be used as a chemical weapon but it’s also a precursor compound for at least one agricultural chemical. So it’s not a WMD.

    It’s thought by some that depleted uranium in ammunition & other projectiles was initiated as a way of disposing of ,well, depleted uranium. Had to get rid of it somehow, so firing it at enemies—and in the world’s oceans by the Navy during “training exercises”—was thought to be a good way of doing so. It wasn’t until 2009 or early 2010 that the Navy announced that it would stop using depleted uranium in its training exercises.

    So, for all those Iraqi & other civilians in areas where depleted uranium was in the ammunition, shells, etc., and all the soldiers who were exposed, oh well.

    And then there’s the various solvents used in jet engine maintenance that the Air Force let flow/go anywhere from the 1960’s, on . . .

    Some tribal councils agree to store radioactive waste on reservation land.


    July 2nd, 2010 at 2:54 pm