How come there are no reports from Iowa about looting, shootings, or people dying on their roof tops?

les s. brings up some valid points (and plays some tiresomely familiar trump cards as well) regarding the differences in the two situations. your questions have a way of making people attempt to get into the heads of the other answerers... why is that?

having spent much of my life in the upper midwest, i can attest that many (not all) iowans and minnesotans have a respect for society, a resiliency ('sisu') and a lack of individual showmanship that isn't always found in all parts of america... might be the predominantly scandinavian upbringing. these traits can manifest themselves in different ways, but it seems logical that those who historically respect authority and put the good of the society over that of the individual (a scandinavian tenet for many, but again not all) will not take advantage of an opportunity to steal from their fellow man.

the timing and pace of the disasters differ as well; the new orleans flood came on almost instantaneously, giving its citizens little time to formulate plans and think things through. even the criminal minds acted in the spur of the moment (they often do)... what is the sense of stealing big screen tvs while there won't be any power to use them for the forseeable future? the iowa floods were predicted, orderly by comparison (with the exception of the levee break in des moines) and planned evacuations were largely successful, along with the orchestrated presence of law enforcement and media. this negated much of the opportunity for chaos.

town psyches: the community that bases much of its culture around a party that never ends (the music! the food!) might have a harder time grappling with the disaster that DOES end the party, its citizens less able to cope because of poverty, politics, and geography, than does a community with a stoic mindset, intact info infrastructure, and working class roots. too, the percentage of gun owners is higher in the south than in the midwest, leading to increased opportunity (weapons easily at hand) for looting and crime.

even if the reasons aren't known why iowans seem to be responding as well as can be expected to these disasters, we can all be pleased that they are, and eager to lend a hand in any way possible. perhaps a lesson was learned from watching the coverage from katrina and rita, and people as well as government can better cope... one can only hope it's not put to the test again so soon.

For joe s....you forget that people in new orleans didnt take the warnings seriously and thought they could just ride it out. There were far too many cars underwater to say they didnt have a way out and also the stupid mayor could have used the buses that ended up getting ruined, had a whole fleet of them under water and then they go and reelect him again after his complete incompetence. Also in the days after people were dying from lack of water and the idiot could have used the food on the grocery store shelves but instead he sent his people to get copy paper and things like that NOT WATER, and don't forget how half the sorry a#$ police force abandoned their jobs. It's pathetic and the people there should take a hard look at THEMSELVES before blaming anyone else. Makes me wonder why we are wasting time rebuilding it, it is just going to happen again new orleans has been sinking for 200 years and it's only gonna get worse. The city should have been relocated............What she is trying to say is quit waiting for the gov. to do everything for you, the truth hurts also!

People in Iowa have learned to take what the government says with the smallest grain of salt possible to avoid getting too much into the wound, We have always been and will be self reliant state with great wisdom and interlocking peace.

you cannot tread on this state. Department of Homeland just shows up to look good and apply for photo ops, but as for survival that is all basic instinct for the people suffering in Cedar Rapids.

The flood in Iowa, despite it being bad, is in no way comparable to the devastation caused by Katrina. The Iowa flood is comparable to other floods while Katrina is comparable to nothing in the history of the United States.

Now, if you want to talk about the people, then you have to realize that the community hit in Iowa is small and middle class. The community hit in New Orleans is probably 100 times larger, which means that there is a higher chance of crime.

Furthermore, the New Orleans residents were in poverty, which means that they were going to get whatever they could. The people in Iowa were probably better off.

Additionally, The people in New Orleans had no way of getting any resources. No food or clean water. People in Iowa have plenty of ways to get to other places and high ground. They have the ability to ship supplies in by ground, making it easier to get aid. If you were in New Orleans, I am sure you would have broken into a 7-eleven to get clean water too.

Even more, After Katrina, FEMA revamped its emergency response teams to better respond to natural disasters. The progress in Iowa is due to the improvements made after Katrina

Look, I believe this question stems from some sort of desire to paint black people as crime ridden filth. It sounds like this question is designed to try and convince people that black people are inferior. It is racist and wrong.

How are you promoting unity and brotherhood by pointing fingers at these two catastrophes and comparing them to one another? These two events are like apples and potatoes, not even close to being similar.

EDIT: Smelly,

You can mask the question in "self reliance" all you want, but listen to your answers. You have people in here suggesting that Black people are lazy and criminals, and that looting and crime aren't occurring in Iowa because white people are "self reliant and good".

Ask yourself, honestly, do you think there was crime in New Orleans because they were black people there? Do you like or trust people of color? Would you become best friends with a colored person? Would you date one? Do you see color when you look at people? Why compare these two disasters? It serves no purpose.

1. They aren't as overly stricken with extreme poverty, as the people the government abandoned in New Orleans were/are.

2. You want to say because in Iowa they are mainly white, in New Orleans they are mainly black, so I'll say it for you.

3. The people in Iowa have vehicles and have left. Nobody left to loot. The people of New Orleans didn't have vehicles. They were largely abandoned by an uncaring government at local, state and federal levels. In their desperation, lawlessness abounds. My family had work in South VietNam. As a child I was there in from June 1973 to December 1974. Siagon fell to the communists in April 1975. December was the beginning of the major communist offensive. At first the government held up against them. Within a month, chaos and panic were spreading all over the country. While in no imminent danger, my father sent my mother, my sister and I out of the country in December 1974. He left in February 1975, two months before the end. Things were pretty much out of control by then.

Because Iowans are generally decent, self-reliant people who have respect for the law and for other people.

The quality of the people is MUCH higher in Iowa!

people in Iowa are too low key self reliant to do anything of the sort...... I doubt the government can take any credit for that.

Because the flooding was widespread over the state, not confined to one city where the people who came to help were not allowed in the city. Meanwhile, the people who were trapped were dying of dehydration and lack of medication. Some people did not get help for a week because the FEMA idiot was confused about whether it was a natural disaster or a terrorist attack. He used the wrong procedures.

Definatey the quality of people

self reliant starts to cover it

I hate that that sounds bad

but so I believe