It's like water for chocolate.
Posted on 09/04/2008 1:28:31 PM PDT by BGHater
Those who love New Orleans say Hurricane Gustav is proof that the billions of dollars spent to protect the city and bring it back to life after the devastating 2005 storm season was worth it.
But what if Gustav had been stronger, a category 4 instead of a 2, and hit the city directly instead of 70 miles to the west? Would it be worth the cost to rebuild New Orleans again if the storm caused widespread destruction as Katrina did?
"That's a question that was there before and after (Hurricane) Katrina, and I think is going to come to the forefront again," said Don Powell, who oversaw the Bush administration's effort to rebuild the Gulf Coast in 2005.
"There's a lot of reasons to continue," Powell said Monday, his voice trailing off. "That's a debate we will continue to have."
Despite fizzling out shortly after it made landfall Monday, Gustav spurred the government into action, probably costing millions of dollars, and put a nation angered by the bungled response to Katrina three years ago back on alert.
Since Katrina ripped through New Orleans three years ago, the federal government has devoted at least $133 billion in emergency funds and tax credits for Gulf Coast disaster relief. Much of it went to rebuilding and better protecting New Orleans from future storms. How much more will be needed after Gustav — or Hurricane Hanna, as that storm creeps up Florida's eastern coast — is unclear.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Evidently, Gustav didn't think so.
>> Would it be worth the cost to rebuild New Orleans again if the storm caused widespread destruction as Katrina did?
That is a question that only the citizens of New Orleans are entitled to answer.
However...
If they answer “yes” — and I don’t blame them if they do — then it is THEIR sole and complete obligation to pay the cost themselves.
It is NOT the duty of the federal taxpayer to pay for the construction of their city.
It's like water for chocolate.
No public money should be used. If private investors and local residents don’t think it’s worth THEIR money to invest in this below-sea-level, hurricane-zone city, then it’s not worth anybody’s money.
We can bulldoze New Orleans right after we bulldoze the towns along the Mississippi River in Missouri. Illinois and Iowa the have flooded multiple times over the last 20 years.
You and I both know what accusation will follow that.
New Orleans continues to sink so it’s just a matter of time before the city is abandoned. Historically there are cities throughout history that have been abandoned, New Orleans will be one of these.
And it will continue to be spent, because that amount is dwarfed into insignificance by the value of trade that passes through the ports of New Orleans and Baton Rouge, as well as the industries that line the banks of the Mississippi.
There is some justification for federal money to be spent on the Mississippi River and the gulf ports, as interstate/international commerce routes. Not to say that the specifics of how it’s been spent have been wise, but there is no constitutional reason why it’s not appropriate to direct federal funds to facilitate this interstate commerce route in accordance with the wishes of the many states which benefit from it. Funneling federal tax dollars to enable the construction and maintenance of homes and businesses in the New Orleans area (or any other area) is not justifiable under any reasonable reading of the Constitution.
Its in a hurricane zone. Hurricanes come every year. They have come every year since time began, and will continue to come every year long after we have left this earth for greener pastures.
Let the locals figure it out. Between the people who choose to live there, investors who want to invest there, local municipalities and parish and no higher than the state of Louisiana, let them figure it out.
Except in extreme cases, or very specific cases of federal responsibility, this should not be a federal issue. No one knows better how to live in a hurricane zone than the people who live there.
Exactly! If you own a home that's 8' below sea level and didn't bother to insure it, why is that my problem? You gambled...you lost...not my problem. Further, until the citizens of NO vote in a competent administration capable of taking less than three years to clean things up in that city, I see no reason to put more money into that sinkhole. Nagin gave $57 million to his 18 contractor friends to strengthen the levies in 2004 and the money is gone and no work was done on the levies. Finally, how many people in NO gave money to help those people in the Midwest who were flooded out this summer? I say not another dime until NO cleans its own house first.
Parts of New Orleans are below sea level. The devices required to protect those areas below sea level will have to be higher, more robust and constantly under maintenance and upgrade. I think one guy ran a computer simulation and came up with 50 foot walls by 2020. A 100 years storm would still surge over those walls and flood those parts of the city below sea level.
Below sea level, get that. You can’t protect those places 100% regardless of how many billions you spend.
Below sea level. What is so hard about that. I don’t want to pay for 50 foot walls and for rebuilding everything behind those walls over and over and over again. Not to mention paying for evacuations every year and in some years multiple times. I don’t want my kids saddled with that bill either.
Its below sea level. What is so hard about that?
I used to live in St.John Parish just up river and loved N.O....Mardi Gras was especially fun because nobody worked on Fat Tuesday...it was like getting an extra holiday every year....today, I wouldn’t want to be around there....blacks have turned it into a dangerous and violent place....too bad.
Some of those Midwest towns along the Mississippi have flooded more often than New Orleans which has flooded twice in the last 43 years. The Feds should set a standard that if your town or home floods more than twice in 20 years that your home and town will not be rebuilt.
If it is, let the locals foot the bill to live there. NO ONE should live below sealevel It is lunacy.
Yes, people and cites that are in a hurricane zone should not be given a dime of Federal Money to rebuild.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.