Reply #26: Why rebuild at all? Denny Hastert was right.

[recidivist]

Hastert committed the classic political blunder of speaking the truth too soon, but he was entirely correct when he said we'd be crazy to rebuild those parts of NO below sea level. The longer we drift along with nothing being done, the clearer that becomes.

To be sure, a few things DO need to be rebuilt. The Port of New Orleans is important and was back in operation in a matter of days. I gather that the oil and gas operations are still repairing a lot of damage, but most of that capacity is also back online. IOW, the economically important, location-dependent things in and around NO are humming along.

To be blunt about it, what really NEEDS to be rebuilt already has been.

The reason we're spinning our wheels about the rest is that it is abundantly clear that it's damned stupid to rebuild below sea level; the insurance industry won't touch it without guarantees; there's really no way to guarantee new levees if the next storm is big enough; and the only entity even remotely willing to waste money on all this is Uncle Sucker, i.e. you and me.

I'm not picking on NO here. As we've moved to a service dominated economy, most businesses, jobs, and residences are no longer really location dependent. The Taco Bells, strip malls, and housing developments can be just about anywhere. That's true in any major city, not just NO. If a natural disaster levelled Philadelphia, Indianapolis, or Cleveland, would we rebuild THOSE cities back to the same size and same pattern? Of course not. We'd clear the ground and rebuild what makes sense under modern conditions.

In NO, it makes no sense to rebuild a disaster-waiting-to-happen. Rebuild on higher ground. If that means most of the people move elsewhere and NO downsizes to a city of 100,000, there's nothing wrong with that.