[ClearCase_guy]

They really need to relocate the city. I for one do not want a single penny to leave my pocket and go toward rebuilding a disaster-that's-waiting-to-happen.

A natural disaster can strike anywhere. Victims need help afterwards. But people who rebuild a city below sea-level, in a Hurricane-rich environment, will get no sympathy from me.

[Graybeard58]

They really need to relocate the city.

How do you relocate a half mil people and their houses? Not to mention replacing every business, of which there are thousands.

[TXBubba]

I agree. When NO was built it wasn't under sea level. It sunk over time. Rebuilding it in the same spot is foolhardy.

[American Quilter]

They really need to relocate the city. I for one do not want a single penny to leave my pocket and go toward rebuilding a disaster-that's-waiting-to-happen.

I agree. If we keep paying people to rebuild anywhere on the hurricane-prone coast (to me that includes North Carolina to Texas), why should they build elsewhere? Let people live on the coast if they want, but make sure they know there won't be a dollar from the government to help them rebuild if a natural disaster wipes them out.

[plain talk]

They may not get your sympathy but they will get your money. But not to just to rebuild the city. They will increase the levees to withstand Class 4/5 hurricanes. THAT will be a massive cost. And it will be done. Any talk of not rebuilding the city is absurd. This is one of the oldest cities in the U.S.