My mind boggles that FR would have pulled this article previously.
I have no objection to government help for the unexpected, hurricaines in California or earthquakes in Florida fall into that category.
I don't at all understand why the government should bail out people who built houses they Knew would be soon destroyed.
I lived most of my life on the Gulf Coast and during the '50s and '60s most everyone got along fine without hurricaine/flood insurance. You either built strong enough to survive, or you built cheap enough the loss was no big deal, or you found a relatively safe piece of ground, but you didn't expect to rp off your fellow citizens to repair your stupidity.
So9
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: Servant of the 9
2 posted on
09/08/2004 8:07:20 AM PDT by
headsonpikes
(Spirit of '76 bttt!)
To: Servant of the 9
I have noticed that articles get pulled when the poster does not use the original publication title.
That is probably the case here, I would bet.
3 posted on
09/08/2004 8:07:38 AM PDT by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
To: Servant of the 9
If they pulled it, it was probably because it was previously posted. Everyone loves Sowell around here.
4 posted on
09/08/2004 8:07:43 AM PDT by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
To: Servant of the 9
Is this Breaking?!?!?!?!?
5 posted on
09/08/2004 8:07:57 AM PDT by
jbstrick
(War is not fought for peace. War is fought for victory.)
To: Servant of the 9
Why was this article previously pulled? It's an excellent article, and Sowell is right on, as usual.
The Russian River in California floods often, and homes are lost every time. And these people get government help and they rebuild right in the same place. Why should we pay for that?
6 posted on
09/08/2004 8:08:17 AM PDT by
.38sw
To: Servant of the 9
My mind boggles that FR would have pulled this article previously.Your mind boggles too easily. It was pulled as a duplicate.
To: Servant of the 9
I don't think there was anything with the content that was objectionable. I would have to guess - and guess is the only thing I can do as I'm not in any way connected with FR mgmt - it was not a content issue.
That said, Sowell rocks. I love him in print and even more so when he's on the radio. VERY smart and direct man.
8 posted on
09/08/2004 8:08:56 AM PDT by
Rate_Determining_Step
(US Military - Draining the Swamp of Terrorism since 2001!)
To: Servant of the 9
9 posted on
09/08/2004 8:09:23 AM PDT by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
To: Servant of the 9
It is already posted and a duplicate was pulled
10 posted on
09/08/2004 8:09:49 AM PDT by
alisasny
("BREAKING: PETA OUTRAGED, Kerry to use hampsters to fire spitballs.")
To: Servant of the 9
I don't understand why victims of the '93 Flood weren't allowed to rebuild in known flood plains but hurricane victims are allowed to rebuild in known areas of hurricane activity.
Why the weather double standard?
11 posted on
09/08/2004 8:09:53 AM PDT by
Blzbba
(John F'in Kerry - Dawn of a New Error.)
To: Servant of the 9
How about the "dumb" that build on or near the fault lines in CA????? There is no correct answer, no good answer.
12 posted on
09/08/2004 8:09:53 AM PDT by
cynicom
To: Admin Moderator
Can you please put in on this????
13 posted on
09/08/2004 8:10:03 AM PDT by
netmilsmom
(Morologus es!)
To: Servant of the 9
I have no objection to government help for the unexpected, hurricaines in California or earthquakes in Florida fall into that category. Another big government FReeper. Can you show me the article in the Constitution that empowers the government to do such a thing?
16 posted on
09/08/2004 8:11:09 AM PDT by
Straight Vermonter
(http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/terroristscorecard)
To: Servant of the 9
I live in flood country. The government got tired of paying for homes along the Mississippi and bought up the homes and properties. Seems like an alternative to me.
20 posted on
09/08/2004 8:12:45 AM PDT by
sarasota
To: Servant of the 9
This is not breaking news. This is opinion/editorial.
If it was posted in breaking news yesterday, then no wonder it was pulled.
It wasn't breaking news yesterday either.
22 posted on
09/08/2004 8:14:13 AM PDT by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proudly Supporting BUSH/CHENEY 2004!)
To: Servant of the 9
"What used to be"--is also a function of high development and vastly increased population. Yesterday I read that even folks in small towns are starting to be driven crazy by road traffic. I can attest the truth of this--and the larger towns and nearby cities, too...in short, there're a lot more people in Fla than there used to be. Shall we move them all out?
Much of what I see on TV that is damaged is not necessarily ocean-front.
Sowell makes a good point. But like many points that libertarians make "on principal" it is ultimately not very helpful--we still have to deal with realities.
25 posted on
09/08/2004 8:17:59 AM PDT by
Mamzelle
To: Servant of the 9
I resent the fact that Federal funds keep going for disasters in Florida.
Perhaps it's high time that instituted a state tax to pay for their own costs of living in an area with unstable weather patterns.
26 posted on
09/08/2004 8:20:00 AM PDT by
mabelkitty
(Zealous Troll Hunter - and you know who you are - you've been warned.)
To: Servant of the 9
Why do they allow "mobile homes" or manufactured housing in a place like Florida? Why aren't the building codes stronger and more realistic? At least in California they've passed stronger earthquake codes for housing.
31 posted on
09/08/2004 8:24:22 AM PDT by
garyhope
To: Servant of the 9
My foreign born wife wonders why people build homes out of wood in coastal areas. In Europe, wooden houses are a curiousity and an oddity.
If these houses were built of mortar concrete and brick with ceramic or metal roofing, all one would need to do is close up the shudders and the house would still be standing when it all blew by. Of course the odd tree may fall on one or some such, but wind would not blow off the roof and destroy it if it were built right.
32 posted on
09/08/2004 8:24:32 AM PDT by
Bon mots
To: Servant of the 9
33 posted on
09/08/2004 8:25:27 AM PDT by
proust
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson