Then it would at least drain properly.clayj said:Time to pull the plug on New Orleans.
Then it would at least drain properly.clayj said:Time to pull the plug on New Orleans.
wordmunger said:Alexandria was a great city with a great library, lost to floods. Here we are today, no better or no worse off, right? Why not say that about New York, or L.A., or anywhere? Why give a f*** about any place? Just let it all rot to hell. There'll still be people around 3000 years from now and they won't give a damn, right?
wrc fan said:So maybe a few 100 college students won't be able to go to New Orleans and show their breasts for beads... we'll still survive with that cultural loss.
yippy said:I agree with clayj. They should not try to rebuild New Orleans right where it was. However, that does not mean a total relocation and abandonment of the historic district. You could just SHIFT the city and move the 80% that is below sea level farther inland or higher up, say, maybe the other side of the historic district. Just move the city a few miles inland, that way it is in a better location, still has its heritage and has that nice flood plain buffer where parts of it used to be.
But apparently if you move a city it has to be a few hundred miles.
Well, having lived in Oklahoma City among a half a million people, I distinctly remember participating in activities beyond grass watching.wordmunger said:Where would you suggest? The middle of Oklahoma, perhaps, on a nice flat plain? What would half a million people do there? Watch the grass wither in the heat?
The problem with Hartford is that its sandwiched between New York and Boston, Hartford was once known as the Insurance capital of the world and thats what helped keep it afloat. When the factories closed a lot of the people moved to the suburbs and the city kind of fell apart. To say that Hartford was a big thriving city was true maybe back in the 1930's but now its really not that impressive as people would rather live and work in the suburbs. While the city was not destroyed by flood (well it was back in 1955) but its also not buried 20 feet below the Connecticut River either. the water that flooded in also receded on its own.clayj said:If we start keeping cities around just because they USED to be thriving (Hartford, CT springs to mind... or Flint, MI), then we are well and truly screwed. Cities are not immortal, nor should they be... they should exist only as long as their citizenry are able to maintain them
Lord Blackadder said:we should ALWAYS attempt to preserve historically significant places. Always. It is irrisponsible to allow history to be destroyed just because saving/preserving them might be inconvenient.
Lord Blackadder said:And as to people being unwilling to pay into the pot...um...well...it's kinda how our entire country works financially. If every city/town/household was on its own we wouldn't have the infrastructure we have. We need the whole country to subsidize relief.
clayj said:And it will happen again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
Time to pull the plug on New Orleans.
clayj said:No, every city exists because of the work of its citizenry. If we start keeping cities around just because they USED to be thriving (Hartford, CT springs to mind... or Flint, MI), then we are well and truly screwed. Cities are not immortal, nor should they be... they should exist only as long as their citizenry are able to maintain them.
thedude110 said:Um, not to be pertinent or anything, but to what degree was this levee "patched?" Does anyone here know much about levee systems? Are there aletrnatives to levees?
anonymous161 said:Well, having lived in Oklahoma City among a half a million people, I distinctly remember participating in activities beyond grass watching.
Um, not to be pertinent or anything, but to what degree was this levee "patched?" Does anyone here know much about levee systems? Are there aletrnatives to levees?
takao said:afaik new orleans is suffering the same problem like venice: geologically it is sinking in (in venice there are further problems) something which perhaps couldn't be anticipated hundreds of years ago
thedude110 said:Oh yeah. Let's raze Hartford. Thats' a great idea. You've done a wonderful job of establishing your credibility in my eyes. Maybe I'll raze your hometown, instead.
Wow. Can you really not understand that there's a difference between destroying a city (which I have NOT suggested doing) and abandoning a city that nature has already taken out?thedude110 said:Oh yeah. Let's raze Hartford. Thats' a great idea. You've done a wonderful job of establishing your credibility in my eyes. Maybe I'll raze your hometown, instead.
clayj said:And it will happen again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
Time to pull the plug on New Orleans.