Snow supports federal agency to rebuild NO

[EvilMonkey]

If it's inevitable, see how easy it would be to insure your house against it.

 

My parents bought a house that according to the Army Corp of Engineers was located in a flood plain, and were required to purchase flood insurance BEFORE they could even buy it. Stuff like that shlould be manditory for locals such as NO where the likelyhood of just such an occurance is very high. Can't afford it? Then don't live there and don't expect the government to pick up your tab when s*** happens. Personally, I wish they would just raze the whole cesspool and make them build on higher ground.

[Balta1701]

With all of these posts saying "Oh, those people should have bought insurance" or "Those people should have been required to buy insurance", I'm left wondering...what would happen to this country if we forced people or didn't help people who didn't buy insurance against some possible but unpredictable catastrophe?

 

Seriously, if the Federal Government plans without expecting a category 3+ storm to hit New Orleans, why should people in that city plan for the government to fail them? They weren't exactly the ones building the levees, and somehow I doubt that the feds went and handed them a brochure 10 years ago saying "you should buy insurance because we didn't build the levees strong enough."

 

If a tsunami devastates New York city, should we tell the people they're SOL because the federal government didn't plan for an island in the Azores to collapse, and they should just get on with their lives and feel lucky they survived? If a Lahar buries Seattle, should we just say "Sorry, you should have bought insurance against Mt. Rainier." Should we expect every single American to purchase insurance to protect him or herself from situations which should have been considered very unlikely, like the complete failure of the levees around New Orleans? Hell, should people who work in high-rise buildings or in government buildings buy terrorist insurance, and be told they're out of luck if they didn't buy it and a terrorist does hit that building?

[EvilMonkey]

Should we expect every single American to purchase insurance to protect him or herself from situations which should have been considered very unlikely, like the complete failure of the levees around New Orleans? 

 

Despite levees being there, the mere fact that they are so far below sealevel and surrounded by higher water should make that event FORSEEABLE. Quite predictable. I believe many of the stories stressed that there had been warnings before. People in CA SHOULD have to have some kind of earthquake insurance. The idiots that have their homes perched on the side of a cliff and have them slide into the ocean every time it rains should be forced to cover that themselves as well.

[YASNY]

Should we expect every single American to purchase insurance to protect him or herself from situations which should have been considered very unlikely, like the complete failure of the levees around New Orleans? Hell, should people who work in high-rise buildings or in government buildings buy terrorist insurance, and be told they're out of luck if they didn't buy it and a terrorist does hit that building?

 

You have a major metropolitan area, built below sea level, surrounder by water on 3 sides in a part of the country that gets consistantly hit by hurricanes and that's considered unlikely. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

[southsider2k5]

With all of these posts saying "Oh, those people should have bought insurance" or "Those people should have been required to buy insurance", I'm left wondering...what would happen to this country if we forced people or didn't help people who didn't buy insurance against some possible but unpredictable catastrophe?

 

Seriously, if the Federal Government plans without expecting a category 3+ storm to hit New Orleans, why should people in that city plan for the government to fail them?  They weren't exactly the ones building the levees, and somehow I doubt that the feds went and handed them a brochure 10 years ago saying "you should buy insurance because we didn't build the levees strong enough."

 

If a tsunami devastates New York city, should we tell the people they're SOL because the federal government didn't plan for an island in the Azores to collapse, and they should just get on with their lives and feel lucky they survived?  If a Lahar buries Seattle, should we just say "Sorry, you should have bought insurance against Mt. Rainier."  Should we expect every single American to purchase insurance to protect him or herself from situations which should have been considered very unlikely, like the complete failure of the levees around New Orleans?  Hell, should people who work in high-rise buildings or in government buildings buy terrorist insurance, and be told they're out of luck if they didn't buy it and a terrorist does hit that building?

 

One HUGE difference is your analogies that goes all of the way back to the framers of the constitution and that is one is an act of God, and the other is an act of War. Take a guess which one the government is consititutionally charged to protect us against, and which one has come about in the 20th century for all practicaly purposes?

[NorthSideSox72]

You have a major metropolitan area, built below sea level, surrounder by water on 3 sides in a part of the country that gets consistantly hit by hurricanes and that's considered unlikely.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Exactly what I've been saying. A disaster COULD hit anywhere, but for NO it was inevitable.

 

National disaster zones, please, Congress. No federal monetary/property assistance for that disaster in that zone, in areas of high likelihood. Rescue and cleanup only. Just like cities/counties do for flood areas.