Hastert Questions Rebuilding New Orleans

September 1, 2005 4:16 PM

Hastert Questions Rebuilding New Orleans Let's see...they're poor, they're black, and they voted for Kerry. He, on the other hand, is rich, fat, white, from Illinois, Speaker of the House and the body behind KOMPAC ("Dedicated to Keeping Our Republican Majority in the U.S. House"). Why on God's green earth would Dennis Hastert want to see New Orleans rebuilt anyway? What a disgrace.
posted by diastematic (75 comments total)

I'm fat, white and and not a Republican.

I think rebuilding NOLA on the same site is flawed idea.
posted by mosch at 4:27 PM on September 1, 2005

(though on the plus side, it should sit a few feet higher, what with all the rubble)
posted by mosch at 4:28 PM on September 1, 2005

I don't think it's a racial issue, and framing it in such away assures that nothing constructive will come out of this thread.

Other than that I have no opinion.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:32 PM on September 1, 2005

WASHINGTON -- It makes no sense to spend billions of dollars to rebuild a city that's seven feet under sea level, House Speaker Dennis Hastert said of federal assistance for hurricane-devastated New Orleans.
posted by bevets at 4:33 PM on September 1, 2005

Man this post sucks. I wish I could express my disgust with diastematic more effectively or eloquently, but all I could come up with is shut the hell up, you unintelligent twit.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 4:34 PM on September 1, 2005

and the "progressive" idea is to shove all them negroes back under sea level???
posted by trinarian at 4:35 PM on September 1, 2005

When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp.

But the fourth one stayed up...
posted by spacewrench at 4:36 PM on September 1, 2005

holy shit i agree with bevets

the seventh deal has been broken



In all seriousness, merely rebuilding without solving the below sea-level problem is perhaps unwise. I guess it's a good time to invest in earth-moving machinery.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:36 PM on September 1, 2005

Rebuilding on the same site should be done at your own peril. You're asking for government intervention to help you fight against nature in an area where nature has the upper hand. Every century or so an event is going to happen that threatens to wipe NOLA off the map.

This is as stupid as the rich morons in California who insist on building palatial estates on a hill of mud.
posted by substrate at 4:36 PM on September 1, 2005

From the linked article: "But you know we build Los Angeles and San Francisco on top of earthquake fissures and they rebuild too. Stubbornness."

BWAHAHAHAHA! I looooove the implication that literally millions of people ought to just stop being so darn stubborn and... and what, Mr. Speaker? Just abandon two major cities and all points in between, which account for billions (if not trillions) of dollars in industry, agriculture, shipping, manufacturing, etc.? Sure! Let's just leave behind a several of the busiest shipping ports on the planet! Let's give up the film industry! Who needs fruits and vegetables? Come on, everybody! Dennis Hastert says there's jobs in Illinois for all of us!
posted by scody at 4:37 PM on September 1, 2005

The important thing to remember is that when a major city is in the midst of total collapse because of the most incompetent disaster relief effort in history, it's not an appropriate time for finger-pointing, but it's a great time to suggest that it's not worth rebuilding.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 4:37 PM on September 1, 2005

Er, seventh seal.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:37 PM on September 1, 2005

diastematic, I don't get the bigotmongering, especially when there's none in the article you linked to. If you have some issue with Hastert, fine, but this post ain't gettin' it.
posted by alumshubby at 4:39 PM on September 1, 2005

your post is a fucking disgrace.

Can we quit with this shit? The situation is hard enough to bear as it is without Metafilter people using it as an excuse to make flimsy Bush-bashing posts. You should be ashamed.
posted by xmutex at 4:42 PM on September 1, 2005

I thought necrophiliacs liked for the body to be COLD, Mr. Hastert?
posted by BoringPostcards at 4:42 PM on September 1, 2005

I think rebuilding NOLA on the same site is flawed idea

if we've got nationalistic pipe dreams to colonize the fucking moon I think we can handle ~10m of storm surge.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:43 PM on September 1, 2005

Armitage Shanks, NOLA is in the midst of total collapse due to FEMA's response? Funny, I thought it was that big fucking Hurricane.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 4:45 PM on September 1, 2005

I say we construct one GIANT dome to contain all of New Orleans! Then, next time this thing happens all they get is more tourists, especially so if the dome is made of a transparent high density material.
posted by TwelveTwo at 4:45 PM on September 1, 2005

So, what about The Netherlands? They seem to have a pretty good handle on the whole "holding back the raging sea" thing. Maybe we should find out what their secret is.
posted by bshort at 4:47 PM on September 1, 2005

What level of capital investment are we talking about here? I found that the Feds were cutting checks for $300M/yr for flood control.

Fucking peanuts.

Grow some perspective, people. The billions we should IMO spend to rebuild NO is engineering jobs, skilled labor.

Capital investment is cool. It's just what the south (and South Central LA for that matter) needs.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:47 PM on September 1, 2005

Nothing I've looked at predicting flooding problems contains the phrase "because mostly black people live there".

Well, there's gonna be a lot of fallout from this disaster. It'll be politicized, racialized, genderized, sliced and diced every which way, heads are gonna roll, agencies are gonna be shook up, and etc.

Everyone with an agenda can be relied on to find some way to start scoring points somehow.
posted by scheptech at 4:48 PM on September 1, 2005

Only racists believe in physics! This may be the definitive Metafilter political post.
posted by LarryC at 4:49 PM on September 1, 2005

($300M/yr flood control for the state of Louisiana, 0.012% of the federal budget)
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:49 PM on September 1, 2005

If we can for a moment cut the name calling, rebuilding the city in its present location needs careful study: how much will it cost to protect the city, this time from the worst hurricanes imaginable (category 5); how many businesses will return to the city? How many of those who fled and had jobs, money saved etc would return etc etc
Model: Hiroshima?
posted by Postroad at 4:50 PM on September 1, 2005

Can we quit with this shit? The situation is hard enough to bear as it is without Metafilter people using it as an excuse to make flimsy Bush-bashing posts. You should be ashamed.

Actually, we're talking about Hastert, here. Pay attention so that you don't waste all that outrage.

Should we ignore all the stupid and insensitive statements by the Speaker of the House and the current Administration or should we call a spade a spade and point out what an incompetent leader Bush is and what a complete asshole Hastert has shown himself to be?
posted by bshort at 4:50 PM on September 1, 2005

Man this post sucks.

Seconded.

*goes off to click [!], wondering if "Noise" is the appropriate box to check*
posted by languagehat at 4:51 PM on September 1, 2005

S@L: no, social collapse caused by abandoning thousands of po' folk in the middle of a disaster area.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:51 PM on September 1, 2005

your post is a fucking disgrace.

Can we quit with this shit? The situation is hard enough to bear as it is without Metafilter people using it as an excuse to make flimsy Bush-bashing posts. You should be ashamed.
posted by xmutex at 4:42 PM PST on September 1

Would you say diastematic's FPP is a) more or b) less reprehensible than shoe shopping during an emergency in which Ms. Rice, as a high-ranking cabinet member, could be making a huge difference in people's survival?

><
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:51 PM on September 1, 2005

This is one of the worst posts I have seen in awhile. Ridiculous.
posted by Falconetti at 4:51 PM on September 1, 2005

So, what about The Netherlands? They seem to have a pretty good handle on the whole "holding back the raging sea" thing. Maybe we should find out what their secret is.

very few category 5 hurricaines ever make it that far north.
posted by crunchland at 4:52 PM on September 1, 2005

Hastert is the same guy who when John McCain, Vietnam POW, questioned cutting taxes during wartime, said "Mr. McCain, do you understand that we have to sacrifice?"

He's a fucking waste of oxygen. And this just proves it further.
posted by jonmc at 4:53 PM on September 1, 2005

So, what about The Netherlands? They seem to have a pretty good handle on the whole "holding back the raging sea" thing. Maybe we should find out what their secret is.
posted by bshort at 4:47 PM PST on September 1

Expensive, unnecessary, resource-depleting wars thousands and thousands of miles away is my guess.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:53 PM on September 1, 2005

If you get a good look at a map, it's pretty clear that this concept of "rebuilding New Orleans" at a different site is kinda loopy, given that there's, well, nowhere else to go. New Orleans is a lot like San Francisco in that way. It is what it is. Let's toss the whole "in its existing location" out the window because it's just not a possibility...you either rebuild it where it is, or you don't at all.

Is it practical to rebuild at all? Hell no! Are San Francisco, LA, Miami, Las Vegas, etc. placed in wholly rational spots on the map? Not when it comes to vulnerability and natural disasters. However, you don't blame the citizens of those places for being "stubborn" when perhaps some of them don't have much of a choice: their families have been there for generations, many don't have the money to move, that's how it is. It ain't smart, but it's far from sensible, especially right now, to blame them for this. And that's what I'm seeing from Hastert right now..."stubborness."

...and why do I think he sees the world this way? Specifically because I have a good hunch that he has absolutely no connection to the people, the culture, the history, the significance of New Orleans. It's totally foreign to him: the city and its residents are "other." Politics aside, it's completely true: he IS white, he IS from somewhere else, he IS totally disconnected from the situation in every possible way. I don't blame him for that. I just think it's really easy for him, given his day-to-day life, to see no valid reason to rebuild New Orleans.
posted by diastematic at 4:53 PM on September 1, 2005

Allow me to speak for the Great State of Nebraska in offering free land to build the New New Orleans in Nebraska. Hell, Ted Turner probably has enough room in Cherry County on one of his buffalo ranches for it. We could use the culture, the tourism, the taxpayers and the color that New New Orleans would bring to our good state. We're pretty much earthquake and hurricane free, too. Darn few levies around here too. Conveniently centrally located for the rest of the country's visitors too. It's an idea whose time has come!
posted by spock at 4:54 PM on September 1, 2005

We need more Katrina threads. We're down to only eleven
posted by fixedgear at 4:54 PM on September 1, 2005

Also, it bears repeating that it's not like this happens every single year. How often does NOLA get hit by a hurricane of this magnitude? Could any costal community have taken it without sustaining massive losses?

Last I checked, coastal Mississippi is above sea level and it looks like it got wiped off the fucking map.

Should we prevent all coastal development? All development near a fault line? Near a volcano? Near a really tall building?

Grow a pair, already. We can rebuild NOLA all shiny and new for probably less than we're spending in Iraq every month, and we'll have fewer people attacking us while doing it, too.
posted by bshort at 4:54 PM on September 1, 2005

We can rebuild NOLA all shiny and new for probably less than we're spending in Iraq every month, and we'll have fewer people attacking us while doing it, too.

My thoughts exactly. Iraq has cost us 10 Katrinas, folks, and we're still in the 2nd act there.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:56 PM on September 1, 2005

"very few category 5 hurricaines ever make it that far north."

Do you know anything about the North Sea? They may not have hurricanes but it's not like they're abutting a calm little wading pool.
posted by bshort at 4:57 PM on September 1, 2005

Armitage Shanks, NOLA is in the midst of total collapse due to FEMA's response? Funny, I thought it was that big fucking Hurricane.

Good to see that Steve got his "liberals blame Bush for the hurricane" talking points.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 4:58 PM on September 1, 2005

spock: NO could use your clean dirt. I hope to see thousands of barges floating dirt down the river. 40' of fill would do the city good, at least for a century. Oddly, the undamaged areas would become the most vulnerable.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:59 PM on September 1, 2005

Hastert is an asshole, but he's always been an asshole. But I still think race has little to do with it, and more over it's just probably because the people he cares about are safe in Ohio, and ultimately his reptilian blood limits his capacity for empathy.

But, what the fuck, why wouldn't you rebuild? Where is the spirit of ingenuity? When nature gets in our way, physically speaking, we find ways around it. I would look at it as a long-term, large-scale reconstruction program that will generate thousands and thousands of skilled jobs, will develop new techniques for flood control, ultimately creating a better New Orleans, and a stronger country. To cut tail and run, it's too defeatist.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:59 PM on September 1, 2005

With global warming very much a reality, hurricanes will be a great deal more common, AND the sea level is going to rise.

It is just impossibly stupid to continue living in that city. There could be another Katrina within the decade. It's not a 300-year storm anymore, people... these things are going to become routine.

Yes, New Orleans is an excellent port with a lot of infrastructure. If we choose a more sensible place to put a port, it will cost a great deal of money to build new docks and pipelines. But we only have to spend that money once. Rebuilding New Orleans is something we'll have to do again and again.

What we need is the political will to think long term and solve this problem RIGHT, so we don't ever have to solve it again. But considering how ineptly this whole thing has been handled, from bottom to top, I'm not liking the chances of a real solution.

THIS is a project worthy of spending three hundred billion on, rather than chasing mirages in the desert. At least we'd have something when we were done.
posted by Malor at 5:01 PM on September 1, 2005

Can we quit with this shit? The situation is hard enough to bear as it is without Metafilter people using it as an excuse to make flimsy Bush-bashing posts. You should be ashamed.

No, we cannot "quit with this shit." This is the precise shit that needs to be raised right now. The last thing I want to hear is a bunch of praise and love from the Bush fedayeen about how wonderful Dear Leader is and how any calls for accountability are "impolite." Bush was completely ineffective in both preparation and immediate domestic response to September 11th, and he's been compeletely ineffective now. The Republican party has acted with hostility towards any sort of disaster preparation or prevention, both in terms of natural disasters and terrorist attacks (what if this hurricane was a biological attack? we'd STILL face many problems with evacuating the city and providing shelter for refugees).

The only difference is that now, unlike September 11th, there's no foreign enemy to attack in response (Afghanistan) and Bush is going to have a hard time trying to drum up support for a war against an unrelated enemy (Iraq) that would distract from the shortcomings of his leadership and his party's policies.

Enough is enough. It's time for a little bit of outrage.
posted by deanc at 5:03 PM on September 1, 2005

AND the sea level is going to rise

if 40' of landfill in the bowl isn't enough for NO, then this nation's going to have a LOT bigger problems than NO.

The French Quarter is hosed tho. Perhaps we can cut it up & raise it like Abu Simbel.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:05 PM on September 1, 2005

< sarcastic mode>I agree with diastematic. If we listened to Hastert there is an excellent chance that all those pesky negroes would survive the next hurricane with comfort and ease. Much better that we should leave them down in that hole while we wait for the next storm.< /sarcastic mode>
posted by Ken McE at 5:07 PM on September 1, 2005

Man, this is quite a fascinating thing, rebuilding NO. We should treat it like a moon colony, a clean-slate chance to design a cool place to live. Instead, we get asshats like Hastert with the vision of a slug.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:08 PM on September 1, 2005

Much better that we should leave them down in that hole while we wait for the next storm

excluded middle fallacy. $60B, one year's cost of our present misadventure in Iraq, would turn that city into the jewel of the Gulf.

$60B divided by 100,000 projects is $600k each. Seems doable, and that's not even counting private investment.

Lemme just throw in my idee fixee -- the LVT -- that would pay for this, too.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:11 PM on September 1, 2005

It's a pity the thread posted immediate after this wasn't the active thread, but, oh well, rules of precedence are what they are.

Hastert may be an arsehole, but as Malor points out, you can't just go ahead and whack up a bunch of new houses and hope that it doesn't happen again. It will, and it will be just as ugly next time around. So watcha gonna do about it?

Personally, if I was getting an insurance payout I would be moving a couple of hundred kilometres inland, or at least a few hundred metres of elevation.
posted by wilful at 5:16 PM on September 1, 2005

This thread is bound for deletion--let's take the rebuild-or-not discussion up to the next thread.
posted by LarryC at 5:17 PM on September 1, 2005

There's a difference between overt racism (or nationalism, or any other 'ism') and that uncomfortable little thing in our subconscious that acknowledges "the other," ... and is sometimes uncomfortable with the other ... and which sometimes would just simply choose to not acknowledge the other.

Although it's more fun to respond to this post thinking that it was about overt racism, it wasn't. Just stating the facts as to why Hastert might see these people as something other than his own up there in Illinois.

My apologies, however, for the political insinuations. That was a load of crap, and doesn't get us anywhere. Not right now anyway...
posted by diastematic at 5:18 PM on September 1, 2005

So wait, now its bad to discuss the asshole politicians discussing what should be done about New Orleans when its not their state or their people?

Damn, I've gotta build me a scorecard to keep track of what I'm allowed to get outraged by.

Because I feel pretty outraged by this asshat of a fool.
posted by fenriq at 5:18 PM on September 1, 2005

My vote is on not rebuilding NOLA, but leaving it untouched so in 20 years we can explore the ruins of what once was New Orleans.

But personally, I think we need more massive ghost towns/ruins for exploring in this country anyways. Someone should fund that shit.
...

Well, perhaps not. In all seriousness, I'm with the rebuilding people. Its not if we can rebuild. We will, out of spite. And a city with a history like New Orleans isn't going to just fade away even after a disaster of this magnitude.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 5:20 PM on September 1, 2005

Enough is enough. It's time for a little bit of outrage.

Damn right.
posted by realcountrymusic at 5:21 PM on September 1, 2005

So watcha gonna do about it?

Simple.

Barge down dirt to fill in the bowl at least. Maybe the outlying areas too.
Build better levees.
Reopen the city, but this time with adequate public transit and bicycle-friendly streets.
Institute a mild LVT regime to help pay for all of it.

But this would require actual enlightened public policy. I expect to see redevelopment of the quality of Maui to occur (anybody who's been there recently can see what a C.F. of private development that island has become).
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:21 PM on September 1, 2005

Damn, I've gotta build me a scorecard to keep track of what I'm allowed to get outraged by.

Now, are you outraged because he said a silly, silly thing, and does so all the time?

Or because you think he wants black people to die?

Just, you know, checking the score card.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:22 PM on September 1, 2005

i don't quite know about sprawl in nola...but i suspect that the population of the city has grown exponentialy in the last hundred years.

what if nola was rebuilt....but zoned a little more logically, i realize this makes no sense at all since it sits in a bowl.

say for instance we only rebuild on ground that isn't right on top of a canal or levee....or say for instance nola is only rebuilt in parts of uptown and the quarter which seem to be sitting on the highest ground. (of course that brings up a whole other class issue....but at this point...it doesn't seem like nola as we know it exists)
posted by oliver_crunk at 5:24 PM on September 1, 2005

Katrina+republicans=GOLD MINE!!!!!!
posted by Citizen Premier at 5:24 PM on September 1, 2005

I say not to rebuild. But they will, anyway. I guess it will generate more dollars in the long run to build it again, till the next time, than to rebuild farther upstream, displacing everything that is there currently.

I think it'll be a wasted effort, for the most part, but it sure will be a money pit for a long time either way.
posted by Balisong at 5:30 PM on September 1, 2005

So, what about The Netherlands? They seem to have a pretty good handle on the whole "holding back the raging sea" thing. Maybe we should find out what their secret is.

Cheese and weed.

Seriously though, comparison is out of the question IMO, as we don't quite get our share of tropical cyclones over here, thankfully. IANAExpert, but I believe that planologists/engineers/etc. from areas that are situated beneath sea level or have a lot of reclaimed land, i.e. DC, Boston, the Netherlands, Hong Kong do confer or have conferred about methods, exchanged knowledge etc. Just as with cities built on fault lines (like on the US West Coast and in Japan), I believe there's just not that much you can do with regards to a major natural disaster such as this one. Apart from a decent evacuation/emergency management plan.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:30 PM on September 1, 2005

but it sure will be a money pit for a long time either way

How much of a money pit? $10B? That's peanuts.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:31 PM on September 1, 2005

i.e. e.g.

I still get those mixed up.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:32 PM on September 1, 2005

If they decide to let some parts be washed out... I think they have to... I wonder how the new imminent domain laws will redivide up the area.

Maybe the New Orleans of The Future will be one of the most modern planned out community living and working space areas in the world.

"We can rebuild it, better, faster, stronger!"

But that'll cost a lot of money, too...
posted by Balisong at 5:35 PM on September 1, 2005

>>ken mce
>>Much better that we should leave them
>>down in that hole while we wait for the
>>next storm

>Heywood Mogroo
>excluded middle fallacy. $60B, one year's cost
>of our present misadventure in Iraq, would
>turn that city into the jewel of the Gulf...

If we give you that $60B, can you use it in such
a way that NOLA rides out the next Katrina
without a fuss? I can see bailing them out once,
but don't want to make a habit of this. The only
ways to do this that I see are:

1.) Move the city inland and uphill
2.) Raise the city in its current location
3.) Build more dikes.

#1 is a massive pain, but it will solve the problem fairly solidly and permanently.

#2 is mechanically possible but would be tricky to do well, and would leave you with all the existing utilities buried 40' deep, where they would be hard to maintain.

#3 is the easiest, but it is also capable of failing, as it did this time and the last time. I assume you realize that Kat didn't even hit NOLA squarely, that next time could be worse? If it was my life, I'd want a fix that was almost incapable of failing.


>Lemme just throw in my idee fixee --
>the LVT -- that would pay for this, too.

What's an LVT?
posted by Ken McE at 5:35 PM on September 1, 2005

I agree that Hastert, like most (though not all) Republicans, is an evil, racist bloodsucker who would sink to absolutely any depths to gain personal or political advantage.

However, the FPP-linked article actually makes him sound quite sensible. The Washington Post pays very good money for journalists who can do that.

steve@linwood, just for you:

The Republican administration which you support has repeatedly cut funding for levee repairs. What foresight. In order to fund the pointless, murderous attack on Iraq. Great. While deliberately undermining what little global action there has been (i.e. Kyoto) on preventing climate change. Strategic thinking there guys.

Thanks steve@linwood for helping all that happen. Which part are you going to claim you didn't understand? Which part are you going to claim we shouldn't talk about right now?
posted by cleardawn at 5:35 PM on September 1, 2005

(Fingersnap!) I've got it. Hastert should organize a program to have all the school children of America collect a cubic yard of fill dirt to ship to the city of New Orleans. Several tens of millions of cubic yards of fill ought to raise the city several feet above its present level.
posted by alumshubby at 5:35 PM on September 1, 2005

Heywood, just to make sure you are in for $10B..
It'll cost trillions.
posted by Balisong at 5:37 PM on September 1, 2005

Does Halliburton get the rebuild contract?
posted by Balisong at 5:38 PM on September 1, 2005

Rebuild or leave, the National Vacant Properties Campaign is going to be very busy:

Creating Opportunity from Abandonment

The American landscape is dotted with hopes and dreams – homes that provide security for countless families, Main Streets lined with opportunity, schools and parks that knit our communities together. As surely as these bricks and beams fulfill our aspirations, the abandonment of houses, neighborhoods and once great landmarks represents dreams unattained and lost, the tragedy of places no longer cared for.

In some cities, vacant properties are rare, standing out like a few missing teeth. But in other communities, the scale of abandonment is far greater, with entire streets and neighborhoods resembling urban ghost towns. For those living among them, vacant properties are nothing short of a curse. Neighbors are forced to tolerate eyesores that attract crime, arson, vermin and dumping. Derelict buildings present safety and fire hazards, reduce property values and degrade quality of life.
posted by cenoxo at 5:41 PM on September 1, 2005

It'll cost trillions.

Great. $2T / $60k/yr is 33 million jobs. Hello full-employment.

I dispute the costs of improving NO's hydrographic profile. Japan's Kansai Airport landfill cost on the order of $10B.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:47 PM on September 1, 2005

What's an LVT?

Taxing the unimproved value of land. The theory is that people are going to pay the market rate for land (but no more), but taxing this rent doesn't raise the market rate, just reduces the amount the landlord pockets.

Many economists consider it the least worst form of taxation. I'm relatively convinced that we're not going to "solve" any economic problem without instituting some form of LVT.

Henry George is an initial populizer of this. It's kinda a lefty-libertarian thing, really.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:50 PM on September 1, 2005

Another "holy shit I agree with bevets" here.
posted by Bugbread at 5:53 PM on September 1, 2005

I think rebuilding NOLA on the same site is flawed idea...Rebuilding on the same site should be done at your own peril...rebuilding the city in its present location needs careful study

you heathens
posted by nervousfritz at 5:53 PM on September 1, 2005

If we choose a more sensible place to put a port, it will cost a great deal of money to build new docks and pipelines.

Oh. Great idea. Should we move the mouth of the Mississsipi, too?
posted by mondo dentro at 6:02 PM on September 1, 2005

Reuters report on BushAdmin's cuts to levee construction.
posted by scody at 6:05 PM on September 1, 2005

The idea that this is a racial issue is ridiculous. The skin color of the average citizen does not sway the whims of the Earth. New Orleans is ocean now.
That said, the history of humanity is strewn with cases of people rebuilding right on top of places where Mother Nature previously smacked them down with a firm "No."
posted by nightchrome at 6:06 PM on September 1, 2005