| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" |
| Date: |
03 Sep 2005 01:15:06 AM |
| Object: |
New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
.
|
|
| User: "cLIeNUX user" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 01:50:43 AM |
|
|
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Not a bad idea for free. Mine's $1,000,000--.
--
Rick (Richard Allen) Hohensee Party of one
candidate, President of the United States of America
humbubba@smart.net Maryland, USA
Ground troops out of Iraq Put the CIA under INS
Semi-legalize drugs Prosecute Bush Tighten the borders
Isolate Israel Tax churches halve military aquisitions
platform ftp://smart.net/pub/humbubba/platform2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Egbert Sousè" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 08:54:36 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 06:50:43 -0000, r@cLIeNUX. (cLIeNUX user) wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Not a bad idea for free. Mine's $1,000,000--.
Every survivor or relative of a survivor of a disaster deserves to be
rich.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neocon Oil Cheerleaders" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 08:46:06 AM |
|
|
In article <gkfih15ukspj1li6s53t29ff4sqjh2jsgk@4ax.com>, says...
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
But not much fun for engineers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_island
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kw" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 06:13:23 AM |
|
|
In article <gkfih15ukspj1li6s53t29ff4sqjh2jsgk@4ax.com>, xeton2001
@yahoo.com says...
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
In reality, they would waste the $10,000 on crack and we would still
have to pay more to "rescue them."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 03:23:02 PM |
|
|
kw wrote:
In article <gkfih15ukspj1li6s53t29ff4sqjh2jsgk@4ax.com>, xeton2001
@yahoo.com says...
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
In reality, they would waste the $10,000 on crack and we would still
have to pay more to "rescue them."
No doubt some would like people sometimes lose their house thru fire
and just blow the insurance money on good times. So what?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "B1ackwater" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 02:10:48 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 06:15:06 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE
<xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Priced houses lately ... ?
I sort-of agree with you however ... if they DO try to
rebuild N.O. then MAKE 'em bring in fill-dirt - enough
to elevate the land until it's five or ten feet above
sea level. May create a big lake in Texas or wherever,
but it WOULD be worth it. Might also make it possible
to get INSURANCE for businesses and homes ...
The existing buildings ... by now the foundations have
gone soft and toxic mold has taken root. Most will have
to be torn down anyway. Since we'd have to start all
over, do it RIGHT this time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
04 Sep 2005 04:47:31 PM |
|
|
B1ackwater wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 06:15:06 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE
<xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Priced houses lately ... ?
Rented an apartment lately??
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 03:08:11 PM |
|
|
B1ackwater wrote:
The existing buildings ... by now the foundations have
gone soft and toxic mold has taken root. Most will have
to be torn down anyway. Since we'd have to start all
over, do it RIGHT this time.
Maybe Bush should buy a copy of SimCity for his PC and try to design a
better New Orleans.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "B1ackwater" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 08:31:37 PM |
|
|
"Steven L." <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
B1ackwater wrote:
The existing buildings ... by now the foundations have
gone soft and toxic mold has taken root. Most will have
to be torn down anyway. Since we'd have to start all
over, do it RIGHT this time.
Maybe Bush should buy a copy of SimCity for his PC and try to design a
better New Orleans.
Not the worst idea ever ...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roneal" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 08:35:37 AM |
|
|
Reading the responses to this post, I have concluded one important fact.
You people don't know W. T. F. you are saying.
You have no knowledge of history, economics, geography, politics, etc. The
port of New Orleans, the petrochemical industry around it, the food supply
(sea food particularly) and countless other essential industries are now
seriously crippled.
And in an appallingly simplistic fashion, you sit at your keyboard and spout
the most idiotic nonsense, indifferent attitudes, and absolute drivel that I
have ever heard.
In the next few months, you will feel the impact of this disaster where you
feel it the most: Your pocketbook.
And in true childlike fashion, you will find some way to blame Bill Clinton
for a winter heating bill that has doubled.
Mother of Pearl!
RO
"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gkfih15ukspj1li6s53t29ff4sqjh2jsgk@4ax.com...
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 09:34:05 AM |
|
|
Roneal wrote:
Reading the responses to this post, I have concluded one important fact.
You people don't know W. T. F. you are saying.
You have no knowledge of history, economics, geography, politics, etc. The
port of New Orleans, the petrochemical industry around it, the food supply
(sea food particularly) and countless other essential industries are now
seriously crippled.
To get those industries back, we certainly don't have to rebuild New
Orleans in its present form, with large neighborhoods of poor people,
many of whom get public assistance.
The poor people should be relocated to other areas of the country where
the demand for jobs is high enough for them to find employment.
The port of New Orleans, the industrial areas, the downtown business
district, and the French Quarter, should be rebuilt and restored.
New Orleans should end up a much smaller city of maybe 200,000
population, mostly middle-class. No more poor people there. The seedy
run-down atmosphere will be gone.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Timothy" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 12:34:15 PM |
|
|
Aside from the legal complications of abandoning or relocating a major
city, the existing location of New Orleans is actually not that bad a
place to put a city. It serves as a port for both the Gulf of Mexico
and the Mississipi-Missouri-Ohio inland waterway, for example. The
fact that the location is at sea level is unfortunate, but that can be
solved by building levees, etc. which actually work.
The city of New Orleans actually survived the hurricane itself pretty
well--- it was the post-storm floods which caused the major
devestation. The worst damage from the hurricane itself was to the
east in the former "Redneck Riveria."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roneal" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 12:23:39 PM |
|
|
The statement you made: "The poor people should be relocated to other areas
of the country where the demand for jobs is high enough for them to find
employment."
What are you saying? The inner city of New Orleans is indeed very poor and
Black. Many will not return, but it will be their decision.
Your statement implies, but does not say directly, that "relocation" should
be implemented. English is subtle, and the meaning of a phrase or word can
be misinterpreted. But I interpret the use of your words to mean that these
refugees would be sent where the Government tells them to be.
Is this your meaning? If it is, then I am firmly convinced that YOU should
be "relocated" to an asylum. Massive relocation of groups of people has
been done, and in our own country as well. (The Trail of Tears - The
Cherokee Indians). Hitler did a bunch of the same crap, not just with the
Jews, but worker populations as well.
The poor are indeed a difficult problem to deal with, but your kind of
thinking is a bigger threat to this country than ANY poverty ridden welfare
recipients could ever be. Ever! In a thousand years.
Go back to the Middle Ages where your kind of thoughts were the norm. This
is America.
RO
"Steven L." <> wrote in message
news:xviSe.5597$Wd7.516@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Roneal wrote:
Reading the responses to this post, I have concluded one important fact.
You people don't know W. T. F. you are saying.
You have no knowledge of history, economics, geography, politics, etc.
The
port of New Orleans, the petrochemical industry around it, the food
supply
(sea food particularly) and countless other essential industries are now
seriously crippled.
To get those industries back, we certainly don't have to rebuild New
Orleans in its present form, with large neighborhoods of poor people,
many of whom get public assistance.
The poor people should be relocated to other areas of the country where
the demand for jobs is high enough for them to find employment.
The port of New Orleans, the industrial areas, the downtown business
district, and the French Quarter, should be rebuilt and restored.
New Orleans should end up a much smaller city of maybe 200,000
population, mostly middle-class. No more poor people there. The seedy
run-down atmosphere will be gone.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Part_Time_Troll" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
05 Sep 2005 02:39:40 AM |
|
|
"Roneal" <roneal@wt.net> in
news:4319db63$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net:
The poor are indeed a difficult problem to deal with, but your kind of
thinking is a bigger threat to this country than ANY poverty ridden
welfare recipients could ever be. Ever! In a thousand years.
they would'nt *get rid* of *all* of "the (semi/unemployable) poor" because they're needed to
keep working poor and near classes from becoming too uppity.
also many working people choose to live near their poor relatives (mom or dad after
disability, etc). (and vice versa)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nog" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
05 Sep 2005 08:37:46 AM |
|
|
"Part_Time_Troll" <Part_Time_Troll@D_Bridge.Com> wrote in message
news:Xns96C8783EA8D17@64.85.239.19...
"Roneal" <roneal@wt.net> in
news:4319db63$0$4862$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net:
The poor are indeed a difficult problem to deal with, but your kind of
thinking is a bigger threat to this country than ANY poverty ridden
welfare recipients could ever be. Ever! In a thousand years.
they would'nt *get rid* of *all* of "the (semi/unemployable) poor" because
they're needed to
keep working poor and near classes from becoming too uppity.
also many working people choose to live near their poor relatives (mom or
dad after
disability, etc). (and vice versa)
Fill in that New Orleans swamp.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 03:13:14 PM |
|
|
Roneal wrote:
The statement you made: "The poor people should be relocated to other areas
of the country where the demand for jobs is high enough for them to find
employment."
What are you saying? The inner city of New Orleans is indeed very poor and
Black. Many will not return, but it will be their decision.
Your statement implies, but does not say directly, that "relocation" should
be implemented. English is subtle, and the meaning of a phrase or word can
be misinterpreted. But I interpret the use of your words to mean that these
refugees would be sent where the Government tells them to be.
Is this your meaning?
No.
My meaning was that the Government should make every effort to find
these people decent jobs in other parts of the country as an *incentive*
for them to move elsewhere.
What the Government should *NOT* do is build new public housing projects
in New Orleans except to house the elderly and disabled. That would be
a combination of carrot and stick to get the poor to decide to live
elsewhere.
A redesigned New Orleans should be designed without slum neighborhoods.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 06:37:07 AM |
|
|
The reality is that most of them WILL relocate "somewhere else." Their
jobs aren't coming back to New Orleans - at least not for a long, long
time. For instance, Tulane Univ. has already told students that it is
cancelling the fall semester - and that they should take courses at
other schools this fall; will Tulane keep paying its professors,
administrators, and nonteaching staff to do nothing while the school is
out of use for (at least) half a year? Will its students - or their
parents - want them to go back to Tulane if it does reopen in the
spring?
No $4 to park! No $6 admission!
http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 06:47:26 AM |
|
|
wrote:
The reality is that most of them WILL relocate "somewhere else." Their
jobs aren't coming back to New Orleans - at least not for a long, long
time. For instance, Tulane Univ. has already told students that it is
cancelling the fall semester - and that they should take courses at
other schools this fall; will Tulane keep paying its professors,
administrators, and nonteaching staff to do nothing while the school is
out of use for (at least) half a year? Will its students - or their
parents - want them to go back to Tulane if it does reopen in the
spring?
No $4 to park! No $6 admission!
http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
Tulane will in all likelihood pay at least the tenured professors while
classes are out to avoid the legal hassles that come with tenure and not
paying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 07:28:11 AM |
|
|
Bob quoted me:
The reality is that most of them WILL relocate "somewhere else." Their
jobs aren't coming back to New Orleans - at least not for a long, long
time. For instance, Tulane Univ. has already told students that it is
cancelling the fall semester - and that they should take courses at
other schools this fall; will Tulane keep paying its professors,
administrators, and nonteaching staff to do nothing while the school is
out of use for (at least) half a year? Will its students - or their
parents - want them to go back to Tulane if it does reopen in the
spring?
and replied:
Tulane will in all likelihood pay at least the tenured professors while
classes are out to avoid the legal hassles that come with tenure and not
paying.
It wouldn't face legal hassles in not paying. If the number of
sections of Organic Chemistry drops from 15 to 10, no prof teaching it
has a legal claim on a job or salary once all nontenured profs are
downsized. (My late father was a prof.) And Tulane WILL have to face
this issue in a few months, anyhow - as I really doubt the students who
just went through this and now will be studying elsewhere will all
return to Tulane, or that their parents will want them to, in the
spring or (more realistically) next fall.
No $6 admission! http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 07:39:58 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Bob quoted me:
The reality is that most of them WILL relocate "somewhere else." Their
jobs aren't coming back to New Orleans - at least not for a long, long
time. For instance, Tulane Univ. has already told students that it is
cancelling the fall semester - and that they should take courses at
other schools this fall; will Tulane keep paying its professors,
administrators, and nonteaching staff to do nothing while the school is
out of use for (at least) half a year? Will its students - or their
parents - want them to go back to Tulane if it does reopen in the
spring?
and replied:
Tulane will in all likelihood pay at least the tenured professors while
classes are out to avoid the legal hassles that come with tenure and not
paying.
It wouldn't face legal hassles in not paying. If the number of
sections of Organic Chemistry drops from 15 to 10, no prof teaching it
has a legal claim on a job or salary once all nontenured profs are
downsized. (My late father was a prof.) And Tulane WILL have to face
this issue in a few months, anyhow - as I really doubt the students who
just went through this and now will be studying elsewhere will all
return to Tulane, or that their parents will want them to, in the
spring or (more realistically) next fall.
No $6 admission! http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
I didn't say they had a legal claim, only that there would be legal
hassles. Having an actual claim is really not an impediment to filing a
lawsuit, it happens daily in this country.
My guess is that the suit would say that laying them off would be
against the Universities tenure policy, based on the fact that
enrollment didn't drop, but was in fact suspended for the semester due
to a natural disaster, therefore they are entitled to be paid.
While they might be wrong, Tulane will have to decide if it's worth the
legal hassles, and bills, to fight such charges in court, or if they are
just better off paying people for not teaching this semester.
Here's a good link to a major problem with tenure, and the hassles it
creates. According to UW, the policy they use is very similar to most
major universities.
http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2005/08/academic_freedo.html
http://crazypolitics.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PagCal" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 04:46:02 AM |
|
|
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Seriously, most of the city should probably be moved 10 miles inland.
Sometimes, it's easier, and cheeper to just start from scratch.
Rebuilding right on the coast could be discouraged by the high rates
required by the insurance industry. Any existing homes that are still
usable could be re-occupied if the owners wanted to have no insurance or
were willing to pay the high rates, but again, owners should be given
the incentive to just have the buildings moved inland.
Central planning for flood zones would be a good idea as well.
Why bother to rebuild dykes that were only designed to withstand a CAT-3
storm when the system proved inefective in the long run.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Egbert Sousè" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 08:58:05 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 05:46:02 -0400, PagCal <pagcal@runbox.com> wrote:
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Seriously, most of the city should probably be moved 10 miles inland.
Sometimes, it's easier, and cheeper to just start from scratch.
Rebuilding right on the coast could be discouraged by the high rates
required by the insurance industry. Any existing homes that are still
usable could be re-occupied if the owners wanted to have no insurance or
were willing to pay the high rates, but again, owners should be given
the incentive to just have the buildings moved inland.
Central planning for flood zones would be a good idea as well.
Why bother to rebuild dykes that were only designed to withstand a CAT-3
storm when the system proved inefective in the long run.
You're making too much sense. I feel dizzy. I must lie down.
Seriously, it's has been done in the upper Mississippi flood plains
and it works.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 10:04:38 AM |
|
|
PagCal wrote:
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Seriously, most of the city should probably be moved 10 miles inland.
Sometimes, it's easier, and cheeper to just start from scratch.
Rebuilding right on the coast could be discouraged by the high rates
required by the insurance industry. Any existing homes that are still
usable could be re-occupied if the owners wanted to have no insurance or
were willing to pay the high rates, but again, owners should be given
the incentive to just have the buildings moved inland.
Central planning for flood zones would be a good idea as well.
Why bother to rebuild dykes that were only designed to withstand a CAT-3
storm when the system proved inefective in the long run.
I am serious. Why do we HAVE to have a new orleans. Just give each
adult money so he or she can relocate to some other city and then the
govt and the taxpayers can wash their hands of the whole thing.
Every day people lose their homes thru fire or flood or tornado and
many don't have insurance and they're simply told to move on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Neocon Oil Cheerleaders" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 10:48:35 AM |
|
|
In article <1125759878.487936.244370@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, says...
PagCal wrote:
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Seriously, most of the city should probably be moved 10 miles inland.
Sometimes, it's easier, and cheeper to just start from scratch.
Rebuilding right on the coast could be discouraged by the high rates
required by the insurance industry. Any existing homes that are still
usable could be re-occupied if the owners wanted to have no insurance or
were willing to pay the high rates, but again, owners should be given
the incentive to just have the buildings moved inland.
Central planning for flood zones would be a good idea as well.
Why bother to rebuild dykes that were only designed to withstand a CAT-3
storm when the system proved inefective in the long run.
I am serious. Why do we HAVE to have a new orleans. Just give each
adult money so he or she can relocate to some other city and then the
govt and the taxpayers can wash their hands of the whole thing.
Every day people lose their homes thru fire or flood or tornado and
many don't have insurance and they're simply told to move on.
Yeah, they could still have a tourist industry
with boat tours of New Orleans. If they do rebuild
though, the city should look into floating the city,
no one will ever get insurance otherwise.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ian Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 06:01:07 PM |
|
|
"Neocon Oil Cheerleaders" <no@nospspam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d836598905d4c7a989720@newsgroups.comcast.net...
In article <1125759878.487936.244370@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
xeton2001@yahoo.com says...
PagCal wrote:
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the
city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O.
Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Seriously, most of the city should probably be moved 10 miles
inland.
Sometimes, it's easier, and cheeper to just start from scratch.
Rebuilding right on the coast could be discouraged by the high
rates
required by the insurance industry. Any existing homes that are
still
usable could be re-occupied if the owners wanted to have no
insurance or
were willing to pay the high rates, but again, owners should be
given
the incentive to just have the buildings moved inland.
Central planning for flood zones would be a good idea as well.
Why bother to rebuild dykes that were only designed to withstand
a CAT-3
storm when the system proved inefective in the long run.
I am serious. Why do we HAVE to have a new orleans. Just give each
adult money so he or she can relocate to some other city and then
the
govt and the taxpayers can wash their hands of the whole thing.
Every day people lose their homes thru fire or flood or tornado and
many don't have insurance and they're simply told to move on.
Yeah, they could still have a tourist industry
with boat tours of New Orleans. If they do rebuild
though, the city should look into floating the city,
no one will ever get insurance otherwise.
"New Venice"?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 06:58:05 AM |
|
|
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
Yeah, $10,000 can solve all their problems. It is easy to say just
move, but they need things like, homes, jobs, schools and so forth to
go to. I don't think 2 Billion can solve that problem. Also, there are
a lot of cities that have a natural disaster that could happen to it.
Should the entire LA basin be picked up and moved because they could
get an earthquake? Why didn't they move Chicago after the fire. Or San
Francisco after the great earthquake. Jamestown PA after the flood.
Xenia after the tornado. Oklahoma City after the tornado. Worcester Ma.
after the tornado in 1954. All natural disasters. Maybe we shouldn't be
so quick to give money to the rich and actually fund the levee system
in New Orleans. That would've cost a lot less, but the rich have no way
to make money off of that. That is all that matters to Bush. Get the
money of the nation to the richest as fast as possible. The president
and his cabinet need to start to take responsiblility for their
actions.
For example, giving tax breaks so people can buy gas guzzling SUV's.
Guess what? That causes undue stress on the system for gas in the
country, so when something like this happens, we all get charged over
$3.00 a gallon. So, conserve for the Hummer!
Go after the oil companies for their reckless charging of the consumer.
Bush says that price gauging won't be tolerated, but there are no
punishments of course. Withhold their massive tax breaks that they just
got in the energy bill from Bush.
Rollback the tax cuts to pay for the damage and rebuilding in New
Orleans. If we can't "cut and run" in Iraq, we can't cut and run on our
own citizens in their day of greatest need.
Throw Ken Lay in prison, just because.
Get the national guard back to what they are supposed to do. 40% of the
National Guard of Mississippi are currently ducking bullets in Iraq,
instead of being here for national emergency. If Bush still wants his
war, get the draft going, bring the Guard back.
Fund projects that are for the common good. The levee system in N.O.
has been neglected by the republicans, now thousands are dead. It's not
a sexy program, but critical, or at least was.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GW Chimpzilla" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 01:33:41 PM |
|
|
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
You still will need a port to transfer goods from ocean-going freighters to
river-going barges. Wasn't New Orleans the third-busiest port in the world?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven L." |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 01:38:08 PM |
|
|
GW Chimpzilla wrote:
You still will need a port to transfer goods from ocean-going freighters to
river-going barges. Wasn't New Orleans the third-busiest port in the world?
Not any more. :-(
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" |
|
| Title: Re: New Orleans - Don't rebuild. Don't relocate. Just abandon it. |
03 Sep 2005 03:38:10 PM |
|
|
GW Chimpzilla wrote:
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
Screw all this talk about spending $50 billion to rebuild the city or
move it elsewhere. There's probably 200,000 adults in N.O. Just give
each one $10,000 and tell them to move somewhere else. Cost $2
billion. Problem solved.
You still will need a port to transfer goods from ocean-going freighters to
river-going barges. Wasn't New Orleans the third-busiest port in the world?
Oh screw that. How many people are needed to work on the ports? You
can still have a small city there for that purpose. Maybe 30,000
people or so.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
