Should worst-flooded areas be left after Sandy?

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Should worst-flooded areas be left after Sandy?

SEA BRIGHT, N.J. (AP) -- Superstorm Sandy, one of the nation's costliest natural disasters, is giving new urgency to an age-old debate about whether areas repeatedly damaged by storms should be rebuilt, or whether it might be cheaper in the long run to buy out vulnerable properties and let nature reclaim them.

http://news.yahoo.com/worst-flooded-areas-left-sandy-162814806.html

i don't think we should. if you live in high risk areas that repeatedly damaged by mother nature, tax payers shouldn't have to keep footing the bill. we have insurance if you want to live in such areas.

 

[Howey]

Many of those homes were built at the beginning of the last century. We have the technology now to rebuild them and make them better.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Should worst-flooded areas be left after Sandy?

SEA BRIGHT, N.J. (AP) -- Superstorm Sandy, one of the nation's costliest natural disasters, is giving new urgency to an age-old debate about whether areas repeatedly damaged by storms should be rebuilt, or whether it might be cheaper in the long run to buy out vulnerable properties and let nature reclaim them.

http://news.yahoo.com/worst-flooded-areas-left-sandy-162814806.html

i don't think we should. if you live in high risk areas that repeatedly damaged by mother nature, tax payers shouldn't have to keep footing the bill. we have insurance if you want to live in such areas.

I don't care where someone builds their house, they just shouldn't want the taxpayer to bail out their poor decisions. The free market would prevent such poor decisions. But the gobblement introduces moral hazard, not only for corporations but the American people as well.


The less economically educated among us will wring their hands and cry that this is what the gobblement is for. I disagree.

Of course as history has shown us, we will just put it in the nations credit card.

Fuck it. Just tax Warren Buffet to pay for it

 

[NOVA]

Again, only the idiots don't get the point......the taxpayers should cease bailing out the folks that keep building in this flood prone and high risk areas....
Its usually the most well off that can afford to buy, build and maintain these ocean front and beach accessible Edens and then when the shit hits the fan, taxpayers, that
get little or no benefit from them, get stuck holding the bag.....public beaches and ocean boardwalks are one thing....private property is quite another. Let the buyers
beware....they should be one their own, with their own insurance coverage just like the regular Joes that own homes and businesses everywhere else in the nation.

Same goes for New Orleans and Fla. resorts that are certainly in the path of storms on a regular basis...infrastructure is one thing, private land is the owners risk, not the concern or
the nations taxpayers that can live 1000 or 2000 miles away....

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Many of those homes were built at the beginning of the last century. We have the technology now to rebuild them and make them better.

reading the article, it isn't about the technology of the homes, rather their geographic location.

what about other his risk areas?

 

[Howey]

Again, only the idiots don't get the point......the taxpayers should cease bailing out the folks that keep building in this flood prone and high risk areas....
Its usually the most well off that can afford to buy, build and maintain these ocean front and beach accessible Edens and then when the shit hits the fan, taxpayers, that
get little or no benefit from them, get stuck holding the bag.....public beaches and ocean boardwalks are one thing....private property is quite another. Let the buyers
beware....they should be one their own, with their own insurance coverage just like the regular Joes that own homes and businesses everywhere else in the nation.

Same goes for New Orleans and Fla. resorts that are certainly in the path of storms on a regular basis...infrastructure is one thing, private land is the owners risk, not the concern or
the nations taxpayers that can live 1000 or 2000 miles away....

So nohomes should be built in the midwest because of tornadoes? No homes should be built in California because of firestorms?

Is there one state in this nation immune from natural disasters?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

So nohomes should be built in the midwest because of tornadoes? No homes should be built in California because of firestorms?

Is there one state in this nation immune from natural disasters?

please read the thread OP again and the linked article. your post has nothing to do with the thread. thanks.

 

[Howey]

please read the thread OP again and the linked article. your post has nothing to do with the thread. thanks.

Sure it does. Didn't you say:

i don't think we should. if you live in high risk areas that repeatedly damaged by mother nature, tax payers shouldn't have to keep footing the bill.

SoCal (isn't that where you live?) is frequently dessimated by fire, floods, and other acts of God. Yet it's constantly being rebuilt.

Joplin, Missouri and parts of southern Alabama have been dessimated four times in recent years. Why rebuild? Let Dixie put her teepee elsewhere.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Sure it does. Didn't you say:



SoCal (isn't that where you live?) is frequently dessimated by fire, floods, and other acts of God. Yet it's constantly being rebuilt.

Joplin, Missouri and parts of southern Alabama have been dessimated four times in recent years. Why rebuild? Let Dixie put her teepee elsewhere.

i do not live in so cal. and as far as i'm aware, especially in flood or landslide prone areas, the government does not help rebuild.

as to the midwest and the south...those areas that have flooded repeatedly by the mississippi river no longer receive federal funds to rebuild. again, we are talking about repeated areas, not just every couple of decades, but repeatedly.

"Building again and again in this very sensitive flood plain will only achieve the same results — flooding, and possibly untimely death," homeowner Tina Downer told about 200 of her neighbors who gathered to discuss a potential buyout program last week. "It is not safe for anyone to live there."