God Spare New Orleans

Originally Posted by glatt

But you still need the pumps to pump out the rainwater. And the pumps fail whenever there is a massive storm.

Also, what's the point of building a levee to protect inferior real estate locations, when there are plenty of places in the country that are above sea level? This isn't the Netherlands. We live in the US. There's lots of land. Let's live on land that doesn't flood when it rains.

If the flooding that was at Katrina levels was on a regular reoccurring basis, I would agree with you.

But that is not the case. This was the perfect storm...once in hundreds of years....compounded by a failure of the infrastructure due to lack of attention and funding.

Sure there's lots of land in the US....there are also flood plains on both coasts, earthquake zones, tornado alley, dust bowls....

So where do you get workers for the shrimping industry or the rice industry on the gulf coast or do we abandon those industries as well? I dont think there is much demand for shrimpers in Detroit.

[Shawnee123]

You live in an area all your life. You have kids, you have aunts and uncles, you have parents, you have neighbors. You know the guy at the grocery store and you pray for his sick wife. You run into old school teachers from time to time. Your "living there" constitutes much more than just where you physically reside. It's a part of you.

Sure, people move away all the time. They don't move their entire lives, and the people they've known and the places they've been: for some this seems it would be pretty tough to do, to start all over somewhere else.

I'd gladly move from here, but there are things that keep me here: my family, my friends, the networks I've built as a result of living here my entire life. I could do it, I'm an adventurous sort, but I know there are people who would rather expire than leave everything they know.

To say "live elsewhere" to a huge population doesn't seem reasonable or feasible. Yes, there was a devastating weather catastrophe. As Redux pointed out, there are ways to prevent so much devastation. It's not like it's happening every other year.

[glatt]

I'm fine with them staying there, if that's their choice. But they should pay for it. If they expect me to bail them out, then they need to show some brains about it. Don't build a house in a swamp surrounded by water in a hurricane zone. Helping them is just enabling them. Like lending money to a gambler.

[Shawnee123]

Not everyone has the finances.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

I would hope that the leadership would realize a city built below sea level wasn't a good idea in the first place and they would instead pay to move them instead. Geez how much more of a hint do they need?

That attitude and resulting corrections had been ongoing in the 1990s. From You're Doing a Heck of Job Brownie:

Furthermore, FEMA is about avoiding damage before that damage can occur. A most famous case is Evansville and Graphton IL where FEMA moved the towns. Other lesser know examples include FEMA's campaign to convince AL homeowners in flood-prone Elba area to sell their homes and relocate. FEMA in the 1990s demonstrated how it is better to solve problems before they happen - which is a well proven William Deming concept.

Such programs were ongoing in CT, DE, CO, IL, MA, MN, MS, MI, MO, ND, SD, WY, UT, TX, and PA when something happened.

These 'mitigation activities' by FEMA were terminated in about 2001 - about the same time that professional disaster managers were being replaced by political appointees.

Due to massive flooding, Graphton IL was moved. Two years later, another Mississippi River flood washed over the same land. But this time, the bottleneck (in part created by dikes in St Louis) did not wash through Graphton. FEMA had moved the town uphill - solved a problem before it happens.

There is no reason to rebuild New Orleans' Ninth ward. Other parts of New Orleans are fine. But it makes no sense to rebuild on land that is already ten feet below sea level - and dropping due to underlying geology.

Nobody is suggesting the Gulf coast should be evacuated. Or that New Orleans should be eliminated. Chantilly Ridge in New Orleans is perfectly safe. But when does it make sense to house a hundred thousand people on land that will always be flooded at least ten feet by a simple category three hurricane? Category Three is what those massive dikes and levees were designed to withstand. And Katrina hit New Orleans as a category three in a region that category threes are too common.

View what happened to St Bernard's Parish. That wave overwhelmed 20 foot dikes. Then traveled a mile plus across marsh land. Then washed out almost all buildings not designed for such flooding. So government should pay to rebuild inferior buildings. Well, St Bernard's Parish is not even at same risk that New Orleans's Ninth Ward is. There is no reason for New Orleans' Ninth Ward to be rebuilt. Want to live in St Bernard's Parish? Then building codes should require expensive structures that can withstand that only category three hurricanes and not yet seen category four hurricane.

Where is the 'theys'? New Orleans Ninth Ward is not same as other parts of New Orleans. And yet the discuss has lumped everyone on the Gulf coast as same. Katrina was not the massive Category Five that it also was. It was only a Category Three made so much worse by, well, where do 85% of all problems originate?

[Shawnee123]

(raises hand) oooh oooh oooh

Top management?

[Undertoad]

Clarification:

Category three hurricane, category five storm surge

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

(raises hand) oooh oooh oooh

Top management?

MBA's?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Where are you guys proposing these 450,000 people, in the city alone, relocate to?

Are there houses in your neighborhoods in which they could reside?

Yup - There are TONS of homes all over the country where they could relocate to. Heck Shaw, It would be A LOT cheaper to move them than rebuild and TRY to protect that which has failed repeatedly. As tw pointed out, this wouldn't be the first time this would have happened either. Some of that are is just really uninhabitable and should remain that way.

[Shawnee123]

Why don't you read my other posts for a reason other than "there are a lot of places to live." I understand there is a lot of land. read my posts. kthx

I also understand that I doubt a lot of these povery-stricken folk could afford or would be welcome in some of your hoity-toity McMansionvilles in which some of you reside.

Also, I am very happy that you and tw agreed on something. I was thinking something about dogs and cats.

[TheMercenary]

It is all about choice. They choose to stay. They will have to start over again. So where is all that wasted money? All those RV's? I just can't see continuing to throw money at a place that is in such great jepordy. Any coastal city is at risk. Few if any are below sea level.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Why don't you read my other posts for a reason other than "there are a lot of places to live." I understand there is a lot of land. read my posts. kthx

I read all your posts

[Shawnee123]

Well, if you read and understood my posts (not saying you have to agree, but that you got the gist of my thoughts on the subject) then you should know that the response "there're all kinds of houses all over the place" did not address what the hell I was talking about.

[classicman]

Are you asking if I disagree that it isn't fair or it'll be hard or or or or.... perhaps I didn't mention that part cuz there wasn't any disagreement there.

Still - Whatever! The parts of the fucking city that are underwater should be given back to mother earth who rightfully reclaimed them with Katrina.
Rebuild safely nearby or go all the way to friggin Alaska - doesn't matter to me.

I got your point - but its the same as those whose homes burn repeatedly in forest fires.
STOP TRYING TO LIVE THERE.
Just my opinion, unpopular as it is. I still get to type it. Pbbbblllllt

[Shawnee123]