Hastert to City: Die
From the excellent Times-Picayune running feed (they call it a blog, but it's a bit more than that):
House Speaker Dennis Hastert says it "doesn't make sense" for the federal government to pay for rebuilding New Orleans.
And the Waterbury, CT Republican-American says "...if the people of New Orleans and other low-lying areas insist on living in harm's way, they ought to accept responsibility for what happens to them and their property."
Uh huh. And if people choose to live in Hastert's Illinois or in Connecticut, far away from supplies of oil and natural gas, they ought to accept responsibility for that choice too.
The whole country is about to go through an energy squeeze thanks to this disruption. Do people expect the energy to be produced here without humans and their families living here? Or shipments of bananas or precious BMW's to be accepted in ports operated by people living in Illinois?
How do you guys feel about Houston? Should the residents of Houston move right now to Illinois, Dennis? I mean if Katrina had hit Houston directly, the calamity would be tenfold that of New Orleans.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert says it "doesn't make sense" for the federal government to pay for rebuilding New Orleans.
And the Waterbury, CT Republican-American says "...if the people of New Orleans and other low-lying areas insist on living in harm's way, they ought to accept responsibility for what happens to them and their property."
Uh huh. And if people choose to live in Hastert's Illinois or in Connecticut, far away from supplies of oil and natural gas, they ought to accept responsibility for that choice too.
The whole country is about to go through an energy squeeze thanks to this disruption. Do people expect the energy to be produced here without humans and their families living here? Or shipments of bananas or precious BMW's to be accepted in ports operated by people living in Illinois?
How do you guys feel about Houston? Should the residents of Houston move right now to Illinois, Dennis? I mean if Katrina had hit Houston directly, the calamity would be tenfold that of New Orleans.
posted by hughw at 3:00 PM
2 Comments:
So...Americans shouldn't live in California because of higher risk of earthquake, or in Oklahoma because of higher risk of Tornado, or etc, etc? It is a sad reflection of our political climate that anyone would suggest that New Oleans is not worthy of being rebuilt. Likewise, it is completely naive to suggest that people should recognize additional risk from catastrophe and "take their lumps"....unbelievable!
First of all, I really liked New Orleans. I thought it was a beautiful, eclectic city. As I strolled down the streets, I was saddened at the thought that within the next fifty to seventy years, it would be underwater.
Economically, though, is it worth rebuilding? Because of the toxic flooding - and I just heard that there were explosions at a chemical storage facility - almost every home and business will have to be rebuilt, regardless of the structural integrity of the building. The chemicals, gasoline, and dead bodies and carcasses will produce horribly toxic molds, endangering everyone in the buildings.
Now look at the cost of rebuilding. It's hard to estimate, but assume that 125,000 houses/apartments are necessary to shelter the population. That's an average of four people per residence - and that's just New Orleans. Assuming the average structure will cost $100,000 to build – conservative because building materials and transportation costs have just skyrocketed because of the damage to rigs and refineries. The new housing costs alone are $12.5 billion. Demolition and ridding the land of toxins before construction will conservatively cost an additional $15 billion. Again, these are just the homes. Demolition, clean up and the rebuilding of businesses is at minimum $20 billion. Then there is the infrastructure - the schools, hospitals, government buildings, entertainment facilities, roads, dykes and levees, bridges...that's at least another $30 billion. Reconstruction at this level will cause building materials to soar to unprecedented levels, making these aforementioned estimates conservative. And that's just New Orleans. There is also Biloxi and all the small towns scattered in between. Rebuilding everything in the two-state area could cost almost $200 billion.
The insurance industry expects $30 billion in payouts. This means all Americans will pay higher insurance premiums. It also has the potential to negatively impact the markets, as the insurance companies have to liquidate holdings since they don’t have $30 billion in a savings account. Much of these payouts involve loss of inventory. Many policies will not cover mold or hurricane damage. The majority of homeowners and businesses will not have enough cash to rebuild the city. Many have to pay off mortgages. Plenty will take the money and run. And probably more than half the population doesn’t have adequate insurance coverage.
There are also the emergency rescue costs to be factored in. How much will it cost taxpayers to fund these efforts?
Maybe if Louisiana and Mississippi had backed a Presidential candidate determined to get the US out of Iraq and Afghanistan (and Kerry had no such plans), then instead of spending hundreds of billions every year on the killing hundreds of thousands men and women and poisoning troops and the local population with deadly Depleted Uranium there would be enough money in the federal coffers to pay for rebuilding. The US spends more on military operations and defense than the rest of the world combined! Now there isn't any money left. All the income tax collected isn't enough to pay the interest on the federal debt, let alone take on new projects.
Also, hurricane season lasts three more months, and given the rising temperatures of the Gulf, it is very likely that the US will be hit with several more hurricanes of similar strength. What happens if these hurricanes strike major ports, refineries, and population centers? Who will pay for the emergency rescue, clean up and rebuilding of infrastructure?
Sure, it may sound heartless, but why should Americans continue to pay for natural disasters? Shouldn’t the states take on these responsibilities? I was so upset after hurricane Andrew as I watched greedy millionaires who wanted to live on the coast in their McMansions built with illegal labor and to laughable standards ask the federal government for handouts. It’s one thing to rebuild roads and schools, but to make taxpayers pay for an oceanfront home is thievery. I gladly help another person in need, but I want the right to know that my money is going to a family or person of my choice. Why should I have to pay for some charlatan’s misfortune?
At some point, people have to take responsibility for their decisions. These states voted Republican claiming to want lower taxes (thought the average poor person paid more in taxes since the Republicans took control of Congress) and limited government (unless it involves teaching Creationism in public schools). The states asking for handouts (Florida included) served up another four years of tyranny under Bush and now I am supposed to pay more in taxes because of their decisions? Nope – that’s one of the reasons I left the country. I am tired of paying for war and welfare to states.
If I lived in Florida (which I have), I would expect a hurricane or two in my lifetime. If I lived in New Orleans, I would expect a disaster just like Katrina. Living in Texas, I expected tornadoes and hurricanes. Living in Arizona, I expected draughts and wildfires. At no time would I ever expect the federal government to pay me if my home or business was damaged. It’s one thing for the federal government to support emergency responses, but it is up to the states to find ways to reduce the damages from likely natural disasters in the form of proper building and zoning regulations, emergency evacuation planning, and budgeting for disasters. States should act responsibly and provided for theirs own needs without asking other Americans to support their decision to live in a hurricane-tornado-earthquake-volcano zone.
A lot of the Republican types talk about how government should be run like a business. The key to any business plan is the critical risk factor. The business must decide all of the worst-case scenarios and make appropriate plans. Natural disaster, theft, fire, market fluctuations, consumer psychology. The best businesses plan for these things. Maybe the folks who talk about the need for business-like efficiency in government should put their money where their mouth is. Plan. Stop wasting the tens of thousands of dollars spent on every US citizen for education and do something with the gray matter.
I know many of the people are poor and I feel for them. Maybe it’s time to start taking the initiative to improve the country instead of the pathetic “America – love it or leave it” slogans shouted at those who try to address the weaknesses and failures in order to correct them. Let’s not forget that those shouts came from a lot of states dependent upon the federal government to subsidize their choices, including Louisiana and Mississippi. I am appalled by FEMA’s inability to handle this mess as well as the lack of National Guard troops who are stuck in Iraq, but I am also repulsed that so many of the victims of Katrina elected the Idiot in Chief to office. At some point people have only themselves to blame.
There must be some rebuilding of the area because the refineries supply oil to the rest of the country. The oil and gas operations need people to run the facilities, and these people require housing, schools, and access to consumer goods. The federal government is justified in rebuilding portions of the area that affect all Americans. However, rebuilding a city that will likely bear the brunt of another hurricane in the future is not something the American taxpayer should be forced to pay for. If individuals and businesses want to donate time and money to rebuild, that is their decision. Rebuilding a city that sits below sea level because it happens to be the home of jazz and cool celebrations just isn’t fair to the American taxpayer.
Post a Comment
<< Home