[independentmind]

Of course this is only my opinion, but the best way to describe what you propose is throwing good money after bad. Leaving alone the possibility of another catastrophic hurricane on the Gulf Coast, I have ZERO confidence that elected officials in Louisiana would handle a rebuilt city any better than they have handled the current one.

[af_vet_rr]

I have ZERO confidence that elected officials in Louisiana would handle a rebuilt city any better than they have handled the current one.

Knowing Louisian the way I do, I have FULL confidence that quite a bit of the rebuilding money will end up in somebody's pockets (and it won't be people working on levees, pumps, dams, etc.).

I also have FULL confidence that corners will be cut, and that they will do the absolute minimum they can do and still get away with it.

Camille wasn't enough of a wake-up call. Georges, a Cat 2 hurricane that was a "near miss" pushed the water within a few feet of the top of the levees just seven years ago.

I have no doubt it will be rebuilt, no matter how many thousands turn up dead this time around. Politicians have ignored the warning signs for years, they've ignored the past natural disasters in that area, they've ignored the US Geological Survey's study five years ago, no reason to think things will change.

[kabar]

Leaving alone the possibility of another catastrophic hurricane on the Gulf Coast, I have ZERO confidence that elected officials in Louisiana would handle a rebuilt city any better than they have handled the current one.

LOL. If that is your criterion, then most of the major cities in the US should be razed and never rebuilt.