• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

WaltonUndercurrent

Beach Lover
Mar 3, 2005
132
0
Death Of An American City
New York Times Editorial
Published: December 11, 2005

We are about to lose New Orleans. Whether it is a conscious plan to let the city rot until no one is willing to move back or honest paralysis over difficult questions, the moment is upon us when a major American city will die, leaving nothing but a few shells for tourists to visit like a museum.

We said this wouldn't happen. President Bush said it wouldn't happen. He stood in Jackson Square and said, "There is no way to imagine America without New Orleans." But it has been over three months since Hurricane Katrina struck and the city is in complete shambles.

There are many unanswered questions that will take years to work out, but one is make-or-break and needs to be dealt with immediately. It all boils down to the levee system. People will clear garbage, live in tents, work their fingers to the bone to reclaim homes and lives, but not if they don't believe they will be protected by more than patches to the same old system that failed during the deadly storm. Homeowners, businesses and insurance companies all need a commitment before they will stake their futures on the city.

At this moment the reconstruction is a rudderless ship. There is no effective leadership that we can identify. How many people could even name the president's liaison for the reconstruction effort, Donald Powell? Lawmakers need to understand that for New Orleans the words "pending in Congress" are a death warrant requiring no signature.

The rumbling from Washington that the proposed cost of better levees is too much has grown louder. Pretending we are going to do the necessary work eventually, while stalling until the next hurricane season is upon us, is dishonest and cowardly. Unless some clear, quick commitments are made, the displaced will have no choice but to sink roots in the alien communities where they landed.

The price tag for protection against a Category 5 hurricane, which would involve not just stronger and higher levees but also new drainage canals and environmental restoration, would very likely run to well over $32 billion. That is a lot of money. But that starting point represents just 1.2 percent of this year's estimated $2.6 trillion in federal spending, which actually overstates the case, since the cost would be spread over many years. And it is barely one-third the cost of the $95 billion in tax cuts passed just last week by the House of Representatives.

Total allocations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terror have topped $300 billion. All that money has been appropriated as the cost of protecting the nation from terrorist attacks. But what was the worst possible case we fought to prevent?

Losing a major American city.

"We'll not just rebuild, we'll build higher and better," President Bush said that night in September. Our feeling, strongly, is that he was right and should keep to his word. We in New York remember well what it was like for the country to rally around our city in a desperate hour. New York survived and has flourished. New Orleans can too.

Of course, New Orleans's local and state officials must do their part as well, and demonstrate the political and practical will to rebuild the city efficiently and responsibly. They must, as quickly as possible, produce a comprehensive plan for putting New Orleans back together. Which schools will be rebuilt and which will be absorbed? Which neighborhoods will be shored up? Where will the roads go? What about electricity and water lines? So far, local and state officials have been derelict at producing anything that comes close to a coherent plan. That is unacceptable.

The city must rise to the occasion. But it will not have that opportunity without the levees, and only the office of the president is strong enough to goad Congress to take swift action. Only his voice is loud enough to call people home and convince them that commitments will be met.

Maybe America does not want to rebuild New Orleans. Maybe we have decided that the deficits are too large and the money too scarce, and that it is better just to look the other way until the city withers and disappears. If that is truly the case, then it is incumbent on President Bush and Congress to admit it, and organize a real plan to help the dislocated residents resettle into new homes. The communities that opened their hearts to the Katrina refugees need to know that their short-term act of charity has turned into a permanent commitment.

If the rest of the nation has decided it is too expensive to give the people of New Orleans a chance at renewal, we have to tell them so. We must tell them we spent our rainy-day fund on a costly stalemate in Iraq, that we gave it away in tax cuts for wealthy families and shareholders. We must tell them America is too broke and too weak to rebuild one of its great cities.
 

Jdarg

SoWal Expert
Feb 15, 2005
18,039
1,984
I know my thoughts on this are going to seem oversimplified, but I look at New Orleans this way- if that city were a family member, and the family member had horrific health issues that could be fixed, the cost would not be an issue. I would just do it. It seems everything our government does revolves around "we'll worry about how to pay for it later", so why can't we just apply that to New Orleans- fix it NOW, then worry about how to pay for it later!
 

aquaticbiology

fishlips
May 30, 2005
799
0
redneck heaven
said it months ago, after the shock wore off - they should have moved the city

they could have employed millions, there would be no unemployment - if they moved the city

brick by brick, block by block, above the lake - if they moved the city

historical and features all intact - just in a different place - if they moved the city

they are idiots for not doing it - they didn't move the city

far to late, they'll probably do it - as it sinks into the sea
 

Travel2Much

Beach Lover
Jun 13, 2005
159
0
aquaticbiology said:
said it months ago, after the shock wore off - they should have moved the city

they could have employed millions, there would be no unemployment - if they moved the city

brick by brick, block by block, above the lake - if they moved the city

historical and features all intact - just in a different place - if they moved the city

they are idiots for not doing it - they didn't move the city

far to late, they'll probably do it - as it sinks into the sea

Or, the freaking Army Corps of Engineers could build levees that meet generally accepted engineering standards to protect one of its cities instead of the negligently designed and built piles of cement they gave the city.

Virtually none of the damage was caused by the hurricane directly.

And, oh, BTW, I am quite clueless as to what you say about unemployment--not really a problem now in New Orleans.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
I thought the damage to NOLA was directly caused by some idiot deciding to build a city along the coast on ground lower than Sea level.
 

tylerT

Beach Lover
Nov 22, 2005
51
0
Smiling JOe said:
I thought the damage to NOLA was directly caused by some idiot deciding to build a city along the coast on ground lower than Sea level.

Yes, that idiot was Bienville, and he did in 1718. The same idiot that settled Biloxi and Mobile. It's amazing what idiots can do.
 

Travel2Much

Beach Lover
Jun 13, 2005
159
0
Smiling JOe said:
I thought the damage to NOLA was directly caused by some idiot deciding to build a city along the coast on ground lower than Sea level.

No, the direct cause of the billions of dollars of damage cauased this year was the levees, and all evidence is showing they were defectively designed.

Just as people who live in glass houses ahouldn't throw stones, people who have or sell million dollar gulf front homes and spend lord knows how much of their time talking about their property values (will they go up? will they go down?) should not mock and belittle those who live in other coastal areas.

You are just irritated because W's approval rating is lower than Nixon's now.

Sick of this nonsense. Bu bye.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
I don't live below sea level, nor in a glass house. Sure the levees broke and that caused homes built below sea level to flood with toxic waste. The fact is, New Orleans was built below sea level. Any 2nd grade student can tell you the potential hazards of building along the sea at an elevation lower than the sea. It ain't rocket science.;-)

By the way, I have never purchased a Gulf-front home, nor will you see me selling products in which I do not believe without throwing extreme caution to the buyer. Some buyers don't want to hear what I say, but I say it just the same.
 
Last edited:
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter