Author Topic: Would you rebuild New Orleans  (Read 7399 times)

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2005, 08:51:27 AM »
Quote
Quote
No one's paid to rebuild the Twin Towers. They will NOT be rebuilt. SF was rebuilt by the residents. Florida is being rebuilt by the insurance companies, who won't be writing any new policies down there, instead the state will have to underwrite insurance.

It's way to early to say that the Twin Towers won't be rebuilt.  As for SF and Florida, go back and check out and see how much federal money were given to these areas -- federal money is ALWAYS given to major catastrophes, NO is only an exception with the AMOUNT of money that is being given.  

Quote
The ties you refer to are emotional.

Why is that such a bad thing?  Do emotions cause us to sacrifice at times?  For country?  For love?  I fail to see how emotions are a detriment in desiring to build back a community for those who lost it.  We don't stand separately as a country -- we stand together.  And it's times like these that prove this is true.  I'm not saying that you don't have a right to disagree -- you have a right to your opinion, I just think you are in the minority.  The majority of Americans WANT NO to be rebuilt -- and that's why it will happen (because that makes it in the politicians best interests to beat the bandwagon drums of public sentiment).  I don't think emotion is such a bad thing (obviously, I'd like to see it tempered with reason and thought) but in this case, I believe emotion and reason causes us to say "REBUILD."
Randy,

FYI, the twin towers will NOT be rebuilt, it's not up for debate.  It's a done deal, it was decided over a year ago that they will not be rebuilt, they've even decided on the replacement structures already.

It's old news.
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

rickortreat

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2005, 08:55:04 AM »
That's the whole point Randy.  When people encounter a loss like this, they want to rebuild.  Everyone with fond memories of the area wants to see it resurected.  But the point is, its YOUR money going to SOMEONE ELSE.

It's not the Politicians.  They never spend their own money, they steal yours and spend it the way they want on your behalf!  Even worse, they won't spend the money fairly or wisely.

Money is power and influence.  Politicians spend money on the supporters who will help them to get re-elected, or give them a job once their term in office is up.  Spending by goverments is inherently distortive to free markets.  We operate under the belief that centralized spending offers certain controls and efficiencies over a free market, but this is false.  Government contracts rarely get the best price or the best results.

When Bush rolled FEMA into Homeland Security, a lot of people in FEMA left, not willing to work with Bush's good ole boys.  They had great plans in place to evacuate the people from NO and never did it.  All that money spent on preparations was wasted by the same people who spent the money on the plans in the first place!

You should understand that when a private individual undertakes to spend some money to improve a property, that they have a commitment to it that's personal, emotional and financial.  They won't pony up the money unless they can see a way for the expenditure to be worthwhile.  This is the opposite of what the government does!

NO will be better for it, if it's rebuilt by people with a profit motive in mind.  And no one will want to build in an area that's prone to flooding without some significant remediation.  The insurance companies won't sell flood insurance there now, would you?  There is an economic reality that affects every responsible decision, like rebuilding a destroyed city.  Will the struture that you build on a thirty-year loan still be standing in 30 years?  Will anyone want to buy it in 30 years?  

It takes more than hope for things to work out.  It takes sober planning and a realistic view of the future.  NO was lucky to have survived so long without more protection than it did.  Everyone got complacent about spending the money to improve the levy system.  They were reluctant to spend the money to even keep the levy able to protect against a category 3 hurricane.  They never even considered that a category 4 or 5 hurricane would come through until a few weeks ago!

It can happen again.  It will happen again, someday.  Will it be built right this time, to withstand a big storm, or will we be reopening our homes and hearts to the people flooded out if it happens again?  Humans should be smart enough to learn from their mistakes!

Jack Handy

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2005, 09:52:40 AM »
Quote
And I thought I was heartless.

You *HAVE* to rebuild the infrastructure.  You have to build back the public services.

Where I draw the line at is rebuilding the BUSINESSES.  There are some developers out there with $$ in their eyes, who are going to be willing to take the risks and pocket the rewards.  LET THEM.
Wow that is such a deep thought.

Especially since rt had just posted:
And forget about public money to rebuild, the only thing the public should be respnsible for is infrastructure, roads, water, sewers and storm drains and that's it. Everything else should be left to private investment.

Offline Reality

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8738
    • View Profile
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2005, 10:01:09 AM »
Quote from: JoMal,Sep 19 2005, 09:47 PM

 :eek2:
Who's going to pay for all of this? Who paid for rebuilding the Twin Towers? Who rebuilt both San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake and most of Florida after the last several hurricane hits it incurred? There is no line in the sand on these things where, after a set number of disasters, you say these latest victims are out of luck. [/QUOTE]

Apparantly the same people who paid for the rebuilding of the Twin Towers paid the Oklahoma City bombing victims.

They got virtually zippo.  Lost houses, lost jobs, need counseling, many are now divorced from the stress.  Meanwhile all kinds of exposes on how many of the 911 victims families who already got 1/2 million from insurance got a bunch more from Bush and company.  Yes tell us about no lines in the sand.

Hey is it Jack Nicholson and the telethon Hollywood crowd who paid for the rebuilding?  Jack and HWood certainly are credible characters along with the govt.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2005, 10:08:35 AM by Reality »

Offline JoMal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
    • View Profile
    • http://
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2005, 10:57:05 AM »
Quote
No one's paid to rebuild the Twin Towers.  They will NOT be rebuilt.  SF was rebuilt by the residents.  Florida is being rebuilt by the insurance companies, who won't be writing any new policies down there, instead the state will have to underwrite insurance.

 
While the Twin Towers are not being rebuilt, they are going to be building something on the site and I am sure plenty of both public and private money will be used, same as in New Orleans, and in San Francisco.

As for SF, the city was rebuilt mostly due to favorable loans made by such local individuals as A.P. Giannini, who gave low interest loans to city residents so they could rebuild. Which is my point. The people who live there actually are pretty willing to do the work necessary to live where they want to live, if given the financial wherewithal to do so, same as the people of New Orleans.

Quote
Anyone can live anywhere they damn well want to, as long as they're willing to accept the consequences.  Some places are more dangerous than others, and some represent an unjustifiable risk.  That risk should not be subsidized by other taxpayers.  If people want to live in places that risky, that should be on their dime.  I don't know how to make this any clearer.

What, exactly, is your point? So it is harder to live at times in New Orleans. This country has always stepped up to help communities hit by catastrophe's. Because you disagree with where New Orleans is located does not separate it from its importance to the region or the country and we all have a vested interest in helping them get back to respectibility, just like anywhere else.

Quote
The ties you refer to are emotional.  So what? No one rebuilt Pompei, they weren't crazy enough to build near a Volcano after that!

Oh brother!!! Up to now I thought you had a clue and now you just blew your logic completely out the window.

No, they did not rebuild Pompei, which was under abount twenty feet of lava; same as Herculaneum, which was a beach resort back in 79 AD, but is now 2 kilometers from the Bay of Naples and fifty to sixty feet under the current city of Herculaneum. Because, Rick, they certainly DID rebuild over the destroyed cities, to the point that now development completely encircles Mount Vesuvius to the west, and vineyards and farms cover the sides of the mountain itself. Try understanding that the current area supports roughly two million crazy people living in the shadow of an active volcano.

Good example, though, and thanks for bringing it up.

Quote
The cost of absorbing the people from NO into other areas, virtually nil.  These people will support the local economies they move to, provide support for rents, labor for jobs, etc.  Cajun food in Seattle, why not!  As long as they're distributed evenly accross the country, it would be a net gain for every community they move to.

You have no way of knowing what kind of impact these people will have on the areas to which they move, but you certainly can understand that the immediate impact will HAVE to be a drain, because they are not working right now, are they? It takes time to become acclimated to new surroundings, while all their lifestyle connections are still all back in New Orleans. To say the cost of absorbing these people is nil is total nonsense.

And Seattle already has Cajun food.

Quote
It isn't my problem and it isn't yours either.  It is your choice to make it one, but I'm not impressed by your arguments at all.  The standard of living I was refering to was that of the people NOT directly impacted by the hurricane. Like you and me.  The issue of employment and price stability is everyone's problem and is primarilly effected by the policies put in place by your government.   But your government isn't interested in these things, or they wouldn't allow our manufactuiring base to be closed down. 

That is just wrong on so many levels, if you don't "get" it, you certainly are not going to understand why this burden is on all of us to share. New Orleans has too much importance to the nation for it not to be a problem for me as well as for you. We do need to see the city bounce back, right where it is. It is important to secure its safety so future hurricanes never devastate it again. And if you do not understand why, then let me address your next point:

Quote
By the way, the Philadelphia area contributes a good deal more to the national economy than NO ever did.  But Philly will never be destroyed so thoroughly by a natural disaster.  And if it was, I wouldn't expect or want help from all over the country,  I'm sure we could handle it.

Okay, Rick, try to absorb this- I found this article from the Washington Post and it puts the affect of the loss economy of New Orleans to the Nation in a very clear perspective:

 
Quote
By Neil Irwin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 1, 2005; Page A01

The effects of the monster storm that devastated the Gulf Coast spread through the nation's economy yesterday, disrupting shipping and rail networks and sending prices for lumber, coffee and other commodities soaring.

Hurricane Katrina is likely to drag down U.S. economic growth in the months ahead, analysts said, threatening what has been a robust expansion.

Katrina's economic effects may be more lasting than those that usually follow big storms, economists and businesspeople said yesterday, owing to the severity of the damage and the unique geography of the New Orleans region. The storm hit a chokepoint in the U.S. economy -- a concentration of ports, rail lines, barge traffic and major highways making up one of the nation's major trade hubs.

New Orleans is underwater, and its future is uncertain -- as is that of the $49 billion in goods, 60 percent of U.S. grain exports, and 26 percent of the nation's natural gas supply and crude oil that flow through nearby ports each year.

"The Mississippi River is the aorta of the American economy, and New Orleans is the access point to it," said Al DeLattre, a supply-chain specialist with consulting firm Accenture Ltd.

In an attempt to fend off disruptions to the nation's fuel supply resulting from the storm, President Bush yesterday moved to release at least 1 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a 700 million-barrel emergency stockpile. Oil prices fell slightly yesterday on the news.

Signs emerged yesterday of the havoc the storm wreaked on the companies and transportation lines that supply the nation, with dozens of firms disclosing the scope of damages at facilities near the Gulf of Mexico or simply stating they could not yet say what that scope might be.

Union Carbide Corp. officials could not even get to their chemicals plant in Hahnville, La., the firm said yesterday, and it will probably take weeks to resume operations there. Chiquita Brands International Inc. reported severe damage at the Gulfport, Miss., facility where it stores one-fourth of the bananas it imports from Central America.

Yellow Roadway Corp., one of the nation's largest trucking companies, has 20 trucking terminals in the area affected by the storm, some of which may have been destroyed, chief executive William D. Zollars said yesterday. With major bridges near New Orleans damaged, the company is routing trucks hours out of their way.

Rail carriers Norfolk Southern Corp., Union Pacific Corp. and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. have all stopped freight traffic into the afflicted area. And shipping experts said it is hard to predict how long it will take the Port of New Orleans and other nearby ports to reopen, given that they may need to dredge new channels and make major repairs. Efforts to reach officials of the Port of New Orleans were unsuccessful yesterday.

"I don't think there is any historical precedent for an incident of this scale," said C. James Kruse, director of the Center for Ports and Waterways at the Texas Transportation Institute.

The damage might even be felt at the breakfast table. New Orleans warehouses hold about a quarter of the nation's raw coffee, 211 million pounds. Concerns that importers will have difficulty rerouting coffee shipments and that large amounts of inventory have been lost pushed the price of coffee for December delivery up to $1.01 a pound yesterday on the New York Board of Trade, an increase of more than 3 cents, after gains Monday and Tuesday.

Let us all know how the affect on the Nation's economy compares to New Orleans if suddenly the rest of us were denied our daily Philly Cheesesteak, okay Rick? And frankly, you are delusional if you think the people of Philadelphia could handle something like Katrina if it struck you the same way as it did New Orleans. I am from Philadelphia, and the most likely outcome of a disaster like this on Philly would be mass murders, looting and the total destruction of any building still standing. So I would agree that no one in their right minds would even venture near the place to try to help for fear of their own safety.    
« Last Edit: September 20, 2005, 11:03:57 AM by JoMal »
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.....We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason.....We are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular....We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

Offline JoMal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3361
    • View Profile
    • http://
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2005, 11:14:00 AM »
Quote
Apparantly the same people who paid for the rebuilding of the Twin Towers paid the Oklahoma City bombing victims.

They got virtually zippo.  Lost houses, lost jobs, need counseling, many are now divorced from the stress.  Meanwhile all kinds of exposes on how many of the 911 victims families who already got 1/2 million from insurance got a bunch more from Bush and company.  Yes tell us about no lines in the sand.

Hey is it Jack Nicholson and the telethon Hollywood crowd who paid for the rebuilding?  Jack and HWood certainly are credible characters along with the govt.
I guess I am a little dense this morning, but is there a point you are trying to make here?

Sounds to me that you are accusing the American people of being overgenerous to a fault and you are complaining about it, so you feel the people of New Orleans do not deserve the same benefits. Apparently, you HAVE drawn a line in the sand and you do not want the American people to cross over it again, am I right?    
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.....We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason.....We are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular....We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

Offline SPURSX3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2839
    • View Profile
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #21 on: September 20, 2005, 12:08:41 PM »
impact?  

the people here in SA are getting free rent and utilities for a year, paid for by the city- in turn reimbursed by FEMA to the city....calculate the cost of all that - please include the medications, the food supplies - which if YOU were actually in the shelters helping you would KNOW it is not all donated, there is food provided by the feds of all sorts, market brand as well as M.R.E.'s that these people are gladly accepting and are thankful for.  total all of that up and let me know if it is NOT impactful.  nobody is saying rebuild the record shops, the bars, the business that CAN rebuild - more than likely they are insured and will have more than enough money to rebuild if they so wanted to.  But they have to get the economy going again in the city, incentives will have to be given out to intice businesses to rebuild there, otherwise, much like the cities population they may just decide it's not worth all of it and not move back at all.  This city will have to entice corporate entities to move back in, and much like ANY other city in the country, the money to motivate them will come from taxes.  In New Orleans Case they are getting a larger than normal assist from the govt, it is after all a "special circumstance."  I have NO PROBLEM in trying to get this city rolling again.  we are not usin the bulk of our tax dollars to rebuild Chase Bank or anything like that, some of the tax money may go to getting them back into the city IF they are not going to rebuild that is.  the bulk of it all will have to go to clean up and decontamination [sp?].  and helping uninsured families, small business, schools, govt branches such as the post office etc.  Is that worth the TWO bucks out of your pocket Rick??


 
On the set of Walker Texas Ranger Chuck Norris brought a dying lamb back to life by nuzzling it with his beard. As the onlookers gathered, the lamb sprang to life. Chuck Norris then roundhouse kicked it, killing it instantly. The lesson? The good Chuck giveth, and the good Chuck, he taketh away.

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #22 on: September 20, 2005, 12:35:56 PM »
Quote
Let us all know how the affect on the Nation's economy compares to New Orleans if suddenly the rest of us were denied our daily Philly Cheesesteak, okay Rick? And frankly, you are delusional if you think the people of Philadelphia could handle something like Katrina if it struck you the same way as it did New Orleans. I am from Philadelphia, and the most likely outcome of a disaster like this on Philly would be mass murders, looting and the total destruction of any building still standing. So I would agree that no one in their right minds would even venture near the place to try to help for fear of their own safety.
I think you may be overlooking the impact of the potential loss of Philly Cream Cheese would have on all of us JoMal.  The economic POWER that Philly yeilds makes NY, Central California and NO look like a mom-n-pop shop.
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"

Offline Skandery

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1710
    • MSN Messenger - skandery27@hotmail.com
    • View Profile
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #23 on: September 20, 2005, 12:56:11 PM »
Some great post on exactly why we should rebuild New Orleans where it stands.  It makes emotional, logical, nationalistic, and god-forbid financial sense to do this.  And I couldn't dream of putting quite as eloquently as JoMaL has.  But I did want to touch on the esteemed leadership of our wonderful nation...

Quote
There are cities worldwide that exist and have existed for centuries behind a levee system and/or canal system, including my own city of Sacramento, Amsterdam, Strasbourg, Venice, and Prague. Seattle was raised a full building floor over the original city site because of tidal flooding.

There was a team of engineers hailing from the Netherlands who wanted to aide our government in planning and schematics of the eventual construction of the levees and dykes.  For those of you that are unfamiliar with the geographical location of the Netherlands, let me oblige.  It sits on the Northwestern shore of the European continent above Belgium and to the West of Germany.  It borders the North Sea and has a huge bay that spills in from the North called the Bay of Ijsselmeer.  Through an extensive network of rivers and lakes, roughly 45 to 50% of the ENTIRE country is below sea level.  In fact here is a great website to peek at:

 http://www.minbuza.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=MBZ302750

What keeps the area shaded in blue from being under water during high tide is a brillant infrastructure of dykes and levees masterfully engineered and improved through centuries of experience.  What you may ask was our leaderships response to this sympathetic gesture of help:

"F*** You, we don't need any of your help!"

These bastards never cease to amaze me.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2005, 12:58:24 PM by Skandery »
"But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in 'reality'. And reality has a well-known liberal bias."

rickortreat

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #24 on: September 20, 2005, 01:17:42 PM »
JoMal you're so off-base on this, I just had to respond.

The US has common interests that tie us together.  We can survice and flourish more easilly together than apart.  So it's in our best interests to support each other in times of need, so that the others in turn can support us in our hour of need.

But that doesn't mean you subsidize living in this place or that without any consdieration for the survivability of a place.  Instead, it means that if we're going to rely on each other to help us, we shouldn't build in harms way!

I gurantee that if they put NO back the way it was, there will be another disaster there within our lifetimes.  That's just plain stupid, and a waste of taxpayers money.

Since NO is at a critical location as a distribution center, it has to be rebuilt to serve as a port.  It makes sense to rebuild, but in a different way so as to make these areas as safe as possible, and able to survive a major storm without suffering a catastrophic loss.

But this is a business decision for the people who decided to live and work there.  It's up to them to built the right way, and that is much more expensive than doing it any way you can.  You just shouldn't build in a place that's prone to flooding.  It's stupid to do so, even if the government gives you loans to do it.

It's like taking money out of your pocket not just to help people, but help them make the same mistake again!  That is a waste of money.  Your money.

I have no problem helping people to get back on their feet, but not in a situation that's designed to fail.  It's tempting fate to do that, and the fates are not kind to the stupid.

It's better for the majority of the people who lived in NO to live elsewhere, in a safer environment that offers more stability.

Phila has over 3  times the number of people that lived in NO, southern Mississipi and Alabama.  It generates a lot more for the US economy than cream cheese.  This is the home to the largest concentration of pharmaceutical companies in the country, with all the brain power that it takes to work in that field.  Philly is also a major port and a central location in the megalopolis that extends from Boston to DC.  

Some of NO's loss might end up being Philly's gain, along with Norfolk, Baltimore and  maybe NYC.

Life is a risk anywhere, but some places shouldn't become major population centers as they are.  LA is a mistake waiting to happen, and so is SF.  Some of the areas in Florida are also vulnerable.  If people want to live in these places, it should be on them to have the wherewithal to survive and come back from a disaster, but they have no right to expect the rest of the more intelligent taxpays to subsidize their lifestyle choices!

Would you loan money to someone to build a refrigerator plant in Alaska, or would you think that was a dumb investment idea.  Spending money anywhere is a risk, hoping that the investment will pan out.  You can build in the other 30 major population centers in the country or in the next 50 less major areas with all those people.  And chances are much better, they won't be flooded out and have to start all over again there.

NO is a high risk area, so you should only build what has to got here, and build it right so it lasts in that environment.  Anything else is a waste of taxpayers money.

By the way it's not just taxes, but the dollar's purcahsing power is going down.  It's down over 25% in the last 3 years, before Katrina struck.  We're broke as a nation, and owe over $2,000 per worker just to pay the debt service.  And now you want to spend another 50 billion on the people in NO?  We don't have the money.  We have to go even deeper into debt to help these people.  And you want to do it in a floodplain!?  

 

 :crazy:  

Offline SPURSX3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2839
    • View Profile
    • Email
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #25 on: September 20, 2005, 01:22:51 PM »
Quote
Some great post on exactly why we should rebuild New Orleans where it stands.  It makes emotional, logical, nationalistic, and god-forbid financial sense to do this.  And I couldn't dream of putting quite as eloquently as JoMaL has.  But I did want to touch on the esteemed leadership of our wonderful nation...

Quote
There are cities worldwide that exist and have existed for centuries behind a levee system and/or canal system, including my own city of Sacramento, Amsterdam, Strasbourg, Venice, and Prague. Seattle was raised a full building floor over the original city site because of tidal flooding.

There was a team of engineers hailing from the Netherlands who wanted to aide our government in planning and schematics of the eventual construction of the levees and dykes.  For those of you that are unfamiliar with the geographical location of the Netherlands, let me oblige.  It sits on the Northwestern shore of the European continent above Belgium and to the West of Germany.  It borders the North Sea and has a huge bay that spills in from the North called the Bay of Ijsselmeer.  Through an extensive network of rivers and lakes, roughly 45 to 50% of the ENTIRE country is below sea level.  In fact here is a great website to peek at:

 http://www.minbuza.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=MBZ302750

What keeps the area shaded in blue from being under water during high tide is a brillant infrastructure of dykes and levees masterfully engineered and improved through centuries of experience.  What you may ask was our leaderships response to this sympathetic gesture of help:

"F*** You, we don't need any of your help!"

These bastards never cease to amaze me.
Venice is also building a sea wall that open and closes to allow water in and prevent it from entering during heavy storm, the city is constanly sinking, gets flooded most days out of the year, and yet these peiople continue to live there as well.. I dont think the world considers tham morons...
On the set of Walker Texas Ranger Chuck Norris brought a dying lamb back to life by nuzzling it with his beard. As the onlookers gathered, the lamb sprang to life. Chuck Norris then roundhouse kicked it, killing it instantly. The lesson? The good Chuck giveth, and the good Chuck, he taketh away.

jn

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #26 on: September 20, 2005, 02:01:05 PM »
I happen to be dating a woman from the Netherlands right now.  Her dad is actually a civil engineer specializing in harbors so I'd been learning about some of this even before Katrina.  

Too be honest, I can't imagine this country being willing to go to the lengths they do to keep the sea at bay.  That would require, you know, cooperation and practicality.  Recently the House Transportation committee built a $250 million dollar bridge from the Alaskan mainland to an island with 50 people and the average American says nothing.  Now that hundreds of thousands of lives are endangered suddenly we can't afford to help?  

Let me see the pork projects cut before I hear one more word about throwing our fellow Americans to the Wolves.


I can't imagine us reaching the kind of consensus the Dutch have in regard to these types of things.  The fact that our population is ten times theirs makes it hard to get a consensus.  In addition, frankly, we are exactly what journalist David Halberstam described us as, an "entertainment culture".  We value a celebrity led fund raiser more than we would long term investment in engineering schools.  

jn

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #27 on: September 20, 2005, 02:07:35 PM »
Exuse my math. We have 20 times their population.  

rickortreat

  • Guest
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #28 on: September 20, 2005, 02:11:17 PM »
Neither Venice nor Amstrdam get hit by category 4 or 5 hurricanes, or anything even close.

Venice is sinking, and one day it won't be livable.  The pylons underneath the City are rotting away.  Amsterdam gets some storms but no surges that threaten to flood the country.  

A better comparison to NO is Bangladesh.  Most cities on a river delta aren't right in the delta, but adjacent to it.  The geography around NO and Bangladesh, doesn't support this so you have cities that are prone to flooding.  Bangladesh is too poor to do anything about it, but in the US, we can if it makes sense.

Engineering can do a lot, but it takes a lot of money to build in a place like NO the right way.  If your're going to rebuild NO, just do it the right way, or don't do it!

And lets do a cost-benefit analysis first to see if it makes economic sense to borrow all that money to make NO a reasonably safe area to build a business or make a life.  

This isn't being cold-hearted, this is being smart, and thinking long-term.  If it's done this way, it's better for the people who live there, and better for the rest of us.

If you just want to put it back the way it was, leave me and my money out of it!  And all of you should feel the same way.  Or do you just like throwing good money after bad?  

Offline WayOutWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7411
    • View Profile
Would you rebuild New Orleans
« Reply #29 on: September 20, 2005, 02:53:33 PM »
Quote
I dont think the world considers tham morons...
Not "tham", but you might be worth considering!  LOL!
"History shouldn't be a mystery"
"Our story is real history"
"Not his story"

"My people's culture was strong, it was pure"
"And if not for that white greed"
"It would've endured"

"Laker hate causes blindness"