Political Crossfire Forums

[The Newb]

Quote: This was in reference to the Superdome...not housing...and the federal government, while covering the majority of the cost, did not take it all.

so local gov needed fed gov help to rebuild the superdome, and did not work on housing first? tell me how that is not backwards

[JohnM]

You're absolutely right. Those 1,800 people that could have had houses can probably just sleep in the Superdome for a while.
Kane wrote: JohnM wrote: You know, you're right. I am sure the people of New Orleans are inspired every morning when they wake up, peek out the window of their house, and see that $184 million stadium staring back at them.



Oh, right, they don't have houses. Well, I am sure that the stadium did something, right?
Kane wrote: Kamel wrote: Kane wrote: That's it, support the idea of open argument. Your avatar suits your stance here... And this is where I stopped reading. The avatar is a joke, and this statement tells me you have nothing to add.

The only focus is on who's to blame, not how to fix it. If you weren't so busy staring at my avatar, you would have gotten that.

:bang:

My god man...

There are other people in this thread that present good reasons for why such a Dome should be rebuilt. That was my point...

I was using your avatar to represent your bias through allocating most of the blame on the local government. The entire state was hit...NO flooded...and you really think the local government can handle the entire situation devoid of Federal assistance? I rest the blame on everybody...

Planning was poor, communication horrid, and precautionary methods obsolete. Excuse me while I argue for the rebuilding of the Superdome.

Let me get this straight...

Your blaming the rebuilding of the Superdome as the reason for there being no homes in NO? :-|

$184 Million...at $100,000 per house equates to 1,840 homes built. I'm afraid it's going to take a bit more than that...

Oh, and then there's the insurance question...

[JohnM]

I said I had really didn't collectively care, not that I didn't care about all of them. I am sure that there are at least 1,800 people down there that aren't dumbasses and could have houses by now. How can you tell me to have some compassion when you just waved off the fact that instead of building those 1800 houses, the Chocolate City decided to build a FOOTBALL STADIUM?
Kane wrote: JohnM wrote: I really quit collectively caring for the city after hearing a family friend in the Coast Guard tell some stories about the rescure efforts.

They would be flying around, looking for people to rescue, when all of the sudden, they would see a flashlight. They flew over to the house and dropped off the swimmer/rescuer. Shortly after, he would come back up without anybody else. Apparently, the people were drunk and just wanted the helicopter to see them. This was right when the flooding was beginning in earnest. This happened about 12 times one night.

That's the spirit...abandon them all for the actions of the few. :roll:

[Kane]

JohnM wrote: I said I had really didn't collectively care, not that I didn't care about all of them. I am sure that there are at least 1,800 people down there that aren't dumbasses and could have houses by now. How can you tell me to have some compassion when you just waved off the fact that instead of building those 1800 houses, the Chocolate City decided to build a FOOTBALL STADIUM?
Kane wrote: JohnM wrote: I really quit collectively caring for the city after hearing a family friend in the Coast Guard tell some stories about the rescure efforts.

They would be flying around, looking for people to rescue, when all of the sudden, they would see a flashlight. They flew over to the house and dropped off the swimmer/rescuer. Shortly after, he would come back up without anybody else. Apparently, the people were drunk and just wanted the helicopter to see them. This was right when the flooding was beginning in earnest. This happened about 12 times one night.

That's the spirit...abandon them all for the actions of the few. :roll:

It's simple really: The local government lacks any capability to rebuild 1/3, 1/4, or even an 1/8 of previously standing homes. Dumping $184 Million in something with a greater return in the long run means more money for everything.

Why do think it the entire responsibility of the local government to rebuild?

[Alizard]

Kane wrote:

It's simple really: The local government lacks any capability to rebuild 1/3, 1/4, or even an 1/8 of previously standing homes. Dumping $184 Million in something with a greater return in the long run means more money for everything.

Why do think it the entire responsibility of the local government to rebuild?

Because the rationale to excuse FEMA's complete bungling is to claim that the local government has to be responsible for everything.

You are correct, of course, getting the stadium back quickly was essential to keeping their franchise which is a net money maker for the city.

[Kane]

The Newb wrote: Quote: This was in reference to the Superdome...not housing...and the federal government, while covering the majority of the cost, did not take it all.

so local gov needed fed gov help to rebuild the superdome, and did not work on housing first? tell me how that is not backwards

Why is it any different than using the Federal Government? I don't understand how you can advocate local government rebuilding (When they clearly lack the resources) and be opposed to federal government aid. Realistically, it shouldn't be either's responsibility so long as insurance has everyone covered. They don't. All levels of the government provide aid...

For everything.

[perdidochas]

JohnM wrote: I said I had really didn't collectively care, not that I didn't care about all of them. I am sure that there are at least 1,800 people down there that aren't dumbasses and could have houses by now. How can you tell me to have some compassion when you just waved off the fact that instead of building those 1800 houses, the Chocolate City decided to build a FOOTBALL STADIUM?

1) It's not the government's job to replace private citizen's houses--they should have insurance for that.

2) The stadium is owned by the state, and the state payed for most of the rebuilding costs.

3) The stadium is a major income source for the city. For example, in 2005, the Sugar Bowl (which is usually held there, wasn't in 2006) brings in about $210 million of income into the city. The superdome is also a great concert venue (I saw U2 there in 1998), and of course has at least ten home Saints games. Those bring in not only ticket income, but also has a multiplier of bringing in restaurant business, and hotel business.

[perdidochas]

The Newb wrote: Quote: This was in reference to the Superdome...not housing...and the federal government, while covering the majority of the cost, did not take it all.

so local gov needed fed gov help to rebuild the superdome, and did not work on housing first? tell me how that is not backwards

The local government's job is not to rebuild houses. That's a private matter. The local government didnt' pay for the rebuilding of the Superdome--that's a state owned thing.

[Kane]

perdidochas wrote: The Newb wrote: Quote: This was in reference to the Superdome...not housing...and the federal government, while covering the majority of the cost, did not take it all.

so local gov needed fed gov help to rebuild the superdome, and did not work on housing first? tell me how that is not backwards

The local government's job is not to rebuild houses. That's a private matter. The local government didnt' pay for the rebuilding of the Superdome--that's a state owned thing.

Isn't FEMA covering about $115 Million?

[JohnM]

perdidochas wrote: The Newb wrote: Quote: This was in reference to the Superdome...not housing...and the federal government, while covering the majority of the cost, did not take it all.

so local gov needed fed gov help to rebuild the superdome, and did not work on housing first? tell me how that is not backwards

The local government's job is not to rebuild houses. That's a private matter. The local government didnt' pay for the rebuilding of the Superdome--that's a state owned thing.
Fine, let the citizens rebuild the houses. But just do something useful with the money. How many people in New Orleans are going to go to the football games? It may have been a big moneymaker at one point, but with a city in ruins, tourism is hardly going to rise because of a football stadium.

[JohnM]

Alizard wrote:
You are correct, of course, getting the stadium back quickly was essential to keeping their franchise which is a net money maker for the city.
Please provide some evidence to prove this instead of talking out of your ass. Just because it used to be a money maker does not mean people will want to go see the games now.

[JohnM]

Kane wrote:
Why do think it the entire responsibility of the local government to rebuild?
Well hell, why was the government even involoved in disaster relief in the first place? Shouldn't that be the responsibility of the citizens? Your contradictory statements are amazing... you damn the government for not helping enough in the beginning, but then a year later, you don't think the government should be involved in relief efforts at all.

[Kane]

JohnM wrote: Kane wrote:
Why do think it the entire responsibility of the local government to rebuild?
Well hell, why was the government even involoved in disaster relief in the first place? Shouldn't that be the responsibility of the citizens? Your contradictory statements are amazing... you damn the government for not helping enough in the beginning, but then a year later, you don't think the government should be involved in relief efforts at all.

Now your just manipulating my concise statements to fit your narrow interpretation.

Government aid is extremely necessary at the onset due to the complete destruction of the local governments ability to respond. It's the responsibility of everyone...not just the government and not just the citizens (Which could arguably include those serving in the government).

Again, where did I say that government relief efforts shouldn't be involved? I'm the one arguing for the Superdome...remember? But to incur the entire cost of rebuilding an entire city (Including the Hundreds of thousands of homes) on the government just seems asinine.

[The Newb]

Kane wrote: Kamel wrote: It is still the responsability of the local government. The Superdome holds no importance because it shouldn't exist, instead, they should have put that money into rebuilding the levees, which were already in sh*tty condition. And again, the avatar is a joke which holds no meaning.

It's still the federal governments responsibility to aid the local government when their capability to respond to their responsibilities is completely diminished.
The Superdome should exist...and now it does. Would you rather they put that little sum of money up for the rebuilding of the levees? It would look miniscule in comparison to the $10 Billion in aid money required for just the repairs...

Repairs

this the quote youre not remebering?

[Snake]

Kane wrote: I doubt that New Orleans could even afford to build a new levee system back then. The estimated $10 Billion for just repairs paired with a speculative $40 Billion cost of repairs and the building of a completely new system leaves $30 Billion. That's damn expensive...

Look at California. We just love taking out our Billion dollar bonds...and we're the 6th largest economy in the world.

I'm willing to bet, that New Orleans let alone the entire state of Louisiana can't afford to pay off such astronomical bonds. The levees could have, and should have been repaired in phases if the amount of money for a complete rebuild was not available. The point is, the levees were neglected for a very long time. What happened is simple cause and effect, and a lesson to be learned from. That lesson is simple: If your city is below sea level, surrounded by water, and relies on a levee system to keep from becoming a lake, the structural integrity of those levees comes before anything else.

[Kane]

The Newb wrote: Kane wrote: Kamel wrote: It is still the responsability of the local government. The Superdome holds no importance because it shouldn't exist, instead, they should have put that money into rebuilding the levees, which were already in sh*tty condition. And again, the avatar is a joke which holds no meaning.

It's still the federal governments responsibility to aid the local government when their capability to respond to their responsibilities is completely diminished.
The Superdome should exist...and now it does. Would you rather they put that little sum of money up for the rebuilding of the levees? It would look miniscule in comparison to the $10 Billion in aid money required for just the repairs...

Repairs

this the quote youre not remebering?

This argues that the Federal Government should pay for the rebuilding of homes how? Note that my inference in that post is used alongside the repairing of the current levee and the astronomical cost of building a new and improved one and that this was in response to Kamel's assertions which I have now also put in bold.

Your not attacking my arguments and are instead sifting through past conversations in order to somehow diminish my integrity? That's class...

[The Newb]

it all starts somewhere first the levees then the homes......

if the fed gov spends on the levees what makes you think la gov will also not expect home rebuilding?

[Kane]

Kamel wrote: Kane wrote: I doubt that New Orleans could even afford to build a new levee system back then. The estimated $10 Billion for just repairs paired with a speculative $40 Billion cost of repairs and the building of a completely new system leaves $30 Billion. That's damn expensive...

Look at California. We just love taking out our Billion dollar bonds...and we're the 6th largest economy in the world.

I'm willing to bet, that New Orleans let alone the entire state of Louisiana can't afford to pay off such astronomical bonds. The levees could have, and should have been repaired in phases if the amount of money for a complete rebuild was not available. The point is, the levees were neglected for a very long time. What happened is simple cause and effect, and a lesson to be learned from. That lesson is simple: If your city is below sea level, surrounded by water, and relies on a levee system to keep from becoming a lake, the structural integrity of those levees comes before anything else.

Seattle Pi

Znet

I can find many more. I blame everybody...

The Federal Government is meant to protect it's nations, cities, and citizens, correct? Is nature not deemed to be such a threat? What of all the federal funding sent to the Army Corps of Engineers prior to Katrina?

[Kane]

The Newb wrote: it all starts somewhere first the levees then the homes......

if the fed gov spends on the levees what makes you think la gov will also not expect home rebuilding?

You mean besides the funding for the levees from the Federal Government prior to Katrina?

[The Newb]

Kane wrote: The Newb wrote: it all starts somewhere first the levees then the homes......

if the fed gov spends on the levees what makes you think la gov will also not expect home rebuilding?

You mean besides the funding for the levees from the Federal Government prior to Katrina?

duh! :roll:

the la gov dropped the ball not the fed gov, its fact and if the fed gov bails them out then what have they learned?

that we dont have to do anything all we have to do is blame fed gov and our problems are solved, in furture events how can you condone this?