Fun Fact #9: The SD wildfires and Katrina are totally differnt situations

I've been paying a lot of attention to the various media sources covering the devastating wildfires. One thing I've been noticing in the coverage is the that comparisons between the wildfires and Katrina are being made a lot. And while I realize comparisons are inevitable, some statements have been made that really irritate me. I'll fully admit my bias toward San Diego considering it is my home, but I still think a lot of the statements would irritate me even without that bias.

A perfect example of these statements can be found in a post from The Daily Kos, a relatively popular political blog. The author discusses the differences in the government response to Katrina compared to San Diego:

Why is the Federal response ..FEMA...to these Wildfires so different that the FEMA response to Katrina? Why aren't there white people begging for water and shelter in a urine/feces filled stadium? Is it because FEMA "learned" from the the mistakes of Katrina, or is it something more obvious?

The wildfires have happened in an area where the people are affluent and white. Everyone is stumbling over themselves congratulating themselves
over how great the Federal response it to the wildfires.

Katrina happened in one of the poorest areas of the country.
San Diego is one of the wealthiest areas of the country.

California has a Republican Governor, Louisiana had a Democratic Governor.

Bush was on Vacation during Katrina.

California Wildfires is happening to RICH WHITE PEOPLE. Katrina Happened to BLACK PEOPLE.

This is not the opinion of just one person, I've read/heard a lot of people making similar statements. But many of these statements seem to stem from broad assumptions and are comparing two totally different situations.

First of all, not everyone in San Diego is wealthy. Yes, cost of living is expensive in San Diego and most people in the affected areas tend to be at least middle class. But since when has being middle class meant you were rich?! The fire did hit some very expensive homes, but it also hit a lot of "normal" homes as well. Some of these people have lived in the area for decades and therefore bought the houses when they were far cheaper. I know plenty of people who lost their homes and I wouldn't call many of them "rich". And even if only "rich" people had lost their houses, how can one try to argue it's not a personal tragedy for them? Yes, it may be easier for them to rebuild, but they still lost their home and all the memories in it. Being "rich" doesn't meant that it wouldn't be a painful experience.

Also, the fires didn't hit a lot of the poorer areas of the city because it stayed in the suburbs, though even if they had I'm sure I'd still be reading accounts of "wealthy" San Diego being hit. And yes, a lot of people in the suburbs are white, but people seem to forget that San Diego, as a whole, has a huge Hispanic population. San Ysidro, an area that's predominantly Hispanic and relatively poor, was evacuated too.

Secondly, as I previously mentioned, the fire hit the suburbs of San Diego, not Downtown where a lot of the city's resources are located. Katrina basically encompassed all of New Orleans. Qualcomm, the stadium where many evacuees were forced to go, is a totally different situation from the Superdome in New Orleans. The fire wasn't happening near it, people weren't trapped there, and vehicles could easily reach it to deliver supplies. Communications (cell towers, etc. ) didn't go down in San Diego like they did in New Orleans, so people were still able to communicate. Also, the local government in San Diego did a great job at responding quickly and effectively to the threat, while the local government in New Orleans certainly faltered on that front during Katrina. And beyond that, San Diego experienced a major fire almost exactly 4 years ago, people knew to be prepared and many knew how foolish it would be to stay.

The seemingly better response shouldn't be attributed to FEMA "caring" more about people in San Diego because they are "wealthy" or white. All in all, I believe that San Diego (and the surrounding counties) were more prepared for a wildfire than New Orleans was for Katrina. People didn't try to "sit it out" and got out quickly, which helps explain the small amount of deaths. And I think that FEMA (and Bush) have appeared to be more proactive because it's their first chance since Katrina to prove to the country that they aren't total screw-ups. I'll admit that California's relative wealth and power (especially compared to that of New Orleans) has helped (and probably will continue to help) the relief efforts. But I think this factors into the state being able to help the victims more, rather than FEMA wanting to help the state more because of it's relative "power".

Basically, I'm just sick of people comparing the two disasters and coming to the conclusion that the wildfires aren't as bad solely because they happened to "rich", white people. Both disasters were totally different and horrible in their own ways, so stop comparing them...