Now I'm pretty sure we all know about hurricane Gustav by now. It's hurling towards the city of New Orleans which just cost American tax payers about 2 billion dollars to rebuild. This time though, the hurricane is flip flopping from a category 3 and 4 while Katrina was only a category 2! My question to you is whether or not you guys think we should rebuild the city if it (which it's almost certain it will) gets destroyed. I'm not saying that we should not help out, and provide homes for these people, but this time move them to a safer location. A lot of people will argue that "Hey this is where I grew up!" or "Why should you get to chose where I live?" but the fact is that it's just going to happen again and again. A thing I've learned in life is that noone owes you anything. You are not entitled to anything that is payed for by other people. It would not be fair for them to ask us once again to build their city, when there are other places to live. Any thoughts?
Well it is going to end up getting rebuilt no matter what happens. But I don't think that the government should be the ones paying for all of it. The people who live there all complain about when is their house going to be built or fixed up. My Uncle lives down there and had to evacuate yesterday and he just moved in a few months ago. I am not saying don't rebuild, but I think that there should be more than just the taxpayers who pay for it.
**** no. Hurricnes will continue to go through there so what's the damn point. **** this subject. Think before you post a debate up.
If the people want to go live there. that's fine. But they should be the ones paying when their homes get destroyed... I'm not an American (I'm Canadian) But I'm sick of all these people complaining about this... YOU CHOSE TO LIVE THERE. DEAL...
the city is below sea level in there efforts to to create levees marshlands and the delta of the Mississippi river are diminishing at an enormous rate. this leaves less room for natural filtration of chemicals like nitrogen from farms to the north that's why there is a dead zone in the gulf nitrogen kills fish so anyone who says we need new Orleans for fishing and shrimping is stupid because the longer new Orleans is there the less fish and shrimp there will be to catch their economy will dwindle the city will get hit by another hurricane and we will have to pay billions of dollars to restore a worthless city believe me i know when i went down to new Orleans this summer to help build houses the only people i met were either only there to help build houses or they were stoners ps don't show your sigs
Ok we all understand that citys should NOT be built below sea level right? Because the oceans are the only place the water drains. We also know that people WILL NOT want to leave there. So, lets compromise: A: Make New Orleans a second Venice, in which case we flood it TO sea level. B:We fill it in with dirt until it is above sea level There we go, no other answer is logical, unless you want to make a city underwater... but thats just ridiculous...
It isn't there fault that hurricanes constantly pass through their city. How are they going to pay to rebuild their city if they lost everything they own excpet the shirts off their backs. New orleans is part of our country, new orleans is like part of our families, if they need help, we should help them. Plus the only reason New Orleans was seriously damaged was because of the destruction of the Levis. if those were still standing, much off the city would be safe from flooding...
America is far too in dept. We should, as a community, pay for it ourselves rather than making the government pay. Having the government pay would cause the state to lose a lot of money that's being used to support the war in Iraq. If the city were to be rebuilt, I believe the landscaping should be better thought out, and should be aware of the natural disasters that might hit the city in the near future.
For those of you who didn't read my post exactly throughly, i said we should rebuild new orleans somewhere else this time.
Are you guys serious? New Orleans is a MAJOR city! You don't just pick it up and move it somewhere else, and yeah it is prone to natural disasters but so is 90 percent of the country, and you seriously don't see the point of having a city at the mouth of the mississippi river delta? It is a major shipping hub believe me New Orleans brings in a lot more money then it takes from reconstruction. God some people are just stupid.
Exacklee. New Orleans is the main port for the USA, the whole reason it was built where it was is because it had easy access to the trade routes to Europe and Asia, if it was moved, even if people were safer (which they would be) America would lose a large chunk of it's trade income, which would push America further into debt, and probably pull Australia down with it... and as an Australian, I don't want that.
No one ever reads my post! Thats why I said FIX the flooding problem. That means make everything below sea level be "water proof" As in one of my two choices earlier. The only reason why every other city in the USA doesn't flood that easily is because those cities are ABOVE sea level, so the water makes its way to a river and out to the oceans... I don't argue the need for New Orleans, I am just saying we need lessen our load in our fight against Mother Nature, because right now, as far as I am concerned, she is winning...
Ok, the debate topic is "should we rebuild New Orleans where it is, or somewhere else?". your post has nothing to do with it, especially since you are suggesting we elevate the city when the main problem is hurricanes as far as I know an extra layer won't protect against gushing wind.
I don't think so. Those people need to move, unless they REALLY want to stay. That place is Hurricane city, god!
When we say we're going to move it, it doesn't necessarily mean we're moving it to were it can't be used a port anymore. There are plenty of of other locations to where it can be moved and not have to worry about natural disasters. We are NOT just blindingly throwing idea out there. Think of what you were saying.
Umm, try reading the first post AND the title "Should we rebuild New Orleans AGAIN?" Next. It is not the winds that caused that much damage. Do you even watch the news? It was the FLOODING that caused most of the problem, and the fact that they couldn't drain it made it take so much time. It would be like putting you cup on your driveway in the middle of a storm and expecting it to be dry in the morning...
Yes, we should build it again. There may be other places to put new orleans but the point is it is near the mississippi delta and thats why it can't move. Also, not building it because it is their fault they live there is like saying not cleaning up the mess in 9/11 because they chose to live in a city with big buildings. Sorry if you didn't understand that.
Andrew Ryan Thought differently... now back on topic.. fill the spot. its only going to happen all over. more lives lost. might as well make a company soylent green out of New New New orlens. >_>
I guess it should. I mean it took this long for the Hurricane, so the next time a hurricane might hit is far from this time. But the 9/11 is far from this, only a few buildings got trashed. Not a whole city.