Originally posted by Sikander
Admit it, you're just trying to get him killed.
As for LA / NO why didn't they fund the improved levee system themselves? It seems a case of penny wise, pound foolish. It may be the same for the Feds, but the Feds have a lot larger constituency and don't suffer as much if LA gets hosed by flooding.
One thing for sure, there should be an in depth study before we sink zillions of dollars into rebuilding the city on the same spot. Is a major city on that spot tenable over the course of a couple of hundred years, with potential increases in the sea level from global warming?
Admit it, you're just trying to get him killed.
As for LA / NO why didn't they fund the improved levee system themselves? It seems a case of penny wise, pound foolish. It may be the same for the Feds, but the Feds have a lot larger constituency and don't suffer as much if LA gets hosed by flooding.
One thing for sure, there should be an in depth study before we sink zillions of dollars into rebuilding the city on the same spot. Is a major city on that spot tenable over the course of a couple of hundred years, with potential increases in the sea level from global warming?
ON TOP OF THAT, the rest of this nation benefits because of the benefits that the Port of New Orleans provides, and on top of that, New Orleans has had to take alot of environmental hits because of all the crap that flows downstream from the Mississipi from all the other states attached to it, further destroying, on top of the levee system the natural barriers that can help alleviate flooding risk.
Comment