Replies

If we rebuilt it right, I wouldn't mind. Basically, we have to bulldoze the entire city, landfill it so that it is above sea level and the level of Ponchartrain, and then rebuild it. There is a reason NO is there--it is located at one of the most geopolitically important spots in the US, no, the world. It is valuable that it is there. But it is not good that it is below the level of the Lake and the Mississippi and the Ocean. There is a way to fix that. If we are going to rebuild, we should do it right.

Basically, we have to bulldoze the entire city, landfill it so that it is above sea level and the level of Ponchartrain, and then rebuild it.

You do realize that that area has been sinking for centuries, and will continue to do so, and that the Mississippi has slowly been rising (due to silt, etc.), as well as the Mississippi will eventually change course, with possibly drastic effects, and last, but not least, hurricanes themselves.

You would be simply buying time until the next major distaster.

I understand where your coming from - it is geopolitically important, but that's not an excuse to put more lives in danger (even if they do it voluntarily).

Remove the entertainment district, what do you have - the port and its shipping, and the oil and gas.

The city doesn't necessarily have to go away, but moving the people 10 or 15 or 20 miles away from the area under water would make a major difference, and would save lives and money in the future.

one of the most geopolitically important spots in the US, no, the world

That's right. Harvest is coming up, too. Can they get enough of the docks back in operation in time for those grain barges? Who will commute 200 miles a day to work there?