August 31, 2005

Should it be rebuilt?

Bob Krumm asks the tough question: Should New Orleans be rebuilt at all?

For some reason I'm reminded of Pompeii. Archaeological evidence shows that the inhabitants of Pompeii were rebuilding from recent earthquakes just before their city was completely wiped out by the eruption from Mt. Vesuvius. In fact, they had rebuilt many times, but they were only delaying the inevitable.

Perseverance can be a good thing, but it might not be the smartest idea when you are living in an area that you know is susceptible to certain types of natural disasters. The Pompeiians might not have known the full extent of what they were faced with, but that makes the case for New Orleans even stronger because they know full well the consequences of living there.

New Orleans will be rebuilt...the levee's will be strengthened...the pumps will be upgraded...but is it the best idea? It's definitely a hard question, but it's good that someone is asking it.

Either way...keep the city and the people of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama in your prayers.

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

I don't think it is even a consideration to rebuild it (in the same place). The government needs to find another location where they can rebuild the affected people. If you rebuild in place it will cost many times more to do and it will just be a matter of time before it happens again.

Posted by: Brad at August 31, 2005 08:15 AM

Great post, we linked back to it and hope that some of our readers come over for a read as well. Yesterday we ask who is ultimately responsible for rebuilding - the individuals that knowing lived in a dangerous area, the insurance companies that collected fees, the taxpayers nationwide, or the church.

http://tinyurl.com/dyng5

Again great job and great points. I had not personally made the link to Pompeii, but it is valid and true.

Posted by: Frank at August 31, 2005 08:51 AM

I agree. We should help the people, because even if we did not they would end up on welfare, but we should not help them rebuild in a inhospitiable place.

Posted by: cube at August 31, 2005 11:26 AM

Blake, we've also been discussing this in the Memphis blogosphere, since Tuesday. Being a Mississippi River town, it holds a special interest for us.

My original post is here and a link-filled followup is here.

Posted by: mike hollihan at September 2, 2005 02:30 PM

So I should assume all those that believe New Orleans should not be rebuilt in the same place also believe that everyone should move out of California? Earthquakes hit more often than once every 40 years. How about all those that live where we hear about the annual forest fires and mudslides? (well ok, to some extent that's the California folks again, but they have some company) At least hurricanes can be forecast semi-reliably. Do you not believe for one second that if a major quake hit Los Angeles (again) they wouldn't be crying immediately for federal assistance? Would you be saying that they shouldn't rebuild, that they should perhaps move to Nevada instead? Natural disasters hit everywhere. The north has blizzards, the midwest tornados, the west earthquakes, the south and east coasts hurricanes. Places in between get a blend. Personally, I'd take a hurricane any day over the other choices.

Posted by: tonya pope at September 21, 2005 09:00 AM