[Rhodes22-list] Why Rebuild New Orleans?

[Slim]

Rummy,

I just can't see it.  Galveston didn't move after the 1900 hurricane, San
Fran didn't move after the 1906 quake, Miami hasn't moved after ... you name
it.  And closer to home, in 1995, Grand Forks, ND was flooded with what they
called the"500 year flood."  I guess that means they don't expect another
one that bad for 500 more years.  The crops were all under water as far as
the eye could see and down town Grand forks was not only under water but
also on fire, not at all unlike NO.  Today, GF looks better than ever.  They
got lots of disaster aid, rolled up their collective sleeves and got 'er
done.  I think NO will do the same.  The city is a gem and they'll be back
on their feet in no time.  I'm not jumping on the blame game bandwagon, but
so many dropped the ball and are now under such scrutiny that now they feel
guilty/obligated and will do anything and everything to make up for it.  And
so they should.

Slim

On 9/15/05 11:56 AM, "R22RumRunner at aol.com" <R22RumRunner at aol.com> wrote:

> The state of Wisconsin has had some experience with moving towns that were
> located in flood prone zones. The southwestern part of the state is very hilly
> and is prone to flash floods, some of epic proportions. After rebuilding
> several  cities time after time, they finally figured out that the three
> cities 
> couldn't  stay were they were. It took a lot of time and persuasion, but the
> cities  relocated and are thriving today due to both state and federal aid.
> The 
> point is  that they are no longer flooding. Cities can be moved and people's
> attitude's  changed. How many more people need die simply to keep a city where
> it
> shouldn't  be.
> Perhaps we should look to correct a problem that was created a long time  ago
> by.......of course, the French. My vote goes with relocating the city.
> 
> Rummy said that.
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list