Hurricane Gustav heading for Louisiana

[adciv]

On a related note, Hanna has been upgraded to a cat-1 and is predicted to give Florida a good stroking.

[ampersand]

I wonder if NBC will send Hannah Storm to cover Hurricane Hanna? (Or is she now with CBS? I can't remember.)

[Martin Blank]

(although you seem to be ignoring the fact that Hannah is right on its tail, and may become a hurricane as well)

I'm not ignoring anything. You just aren't doing your research -- as usual. Hannah isn't going anywhere near New Orleans. It's going up the Eastern Seaboard.

[collegestudent22]

It was further out and less predictable when I stated that. It was unknown whether it would even become a hurricane, much less which direction it would turn. In fact, Gustav turned at the last second to lessen the effect on New Orleans as well. None of this dismisses the underlying precept that it is just mind-bogglingly stupid for the government to rebuild in the same place and for the citizens to return to live in a place that was just destroyed.....

[Hirschof]

although you seem to be ignoring the fact that Hannah is right on its tail, and may become a hurricane as well

It was further out and less predictable when I stated that.

Why the fuck open your mouth?

[collegestudent22]

although you seem to be ignoring the fact that Hannah is right on its tail, and may become a hurricane as well

It was further out and less predictable when I stated that.

Again, at the time, Hanna was right behind Gustav. It was not yet a hurricane. As it was not, the predictions on what it would do and where it would go were different than they would be if it was a hurricane. So it was not yet known that it was going to move up the Eastern Seaboard, and some weather reports were predicting that it MAY HAVE followed Gustav into the Gulf.

[Martin Blank]

Not at the time you posted, no. I hit the NHC site about three or four times a day during hurricane season. By Sunday, the track was headed into Georgia. There is -- and has been over the last two days -- effectively no chance that it would turn towards New Orleans.

[FirebirdNC]

None of this dismisses the underlying precept that it is just mind-bogglingly stupid for the government to rebuild in the same place and for the citizens to return to live in a place that was just destroyed.....

Speaking as someone who lives in a hurricane prone area, has been through many hurricanes and seen the damage they can do up close and personal. It is very easy for you or any other outsider to look in and make comments like that, about how stupid the people are and how can they keep going back there. When your family has lived somewhere for generations you don't quit just because mother nature is having a tantrum. You clean up pick up rebuild and go on, and frankly your comment about "just move the town inland" is even more mind bogglingly stupid to quote you.

Yes I agree that at some point the government/taxes should not be used. If people choose to stay in a location that has proven time and again to be a hazard then it's on them to help themselves, but don't get on your high horse and declare they are idiots for wanting to live there life where they choose. For a "collegestudent" you don't seem to be opening your mind or broadening your horizons.

[StruckingFuggle]

Just because you're doing it for pride or for some sort of family thing, "because that's where home is", doesn't really make it not stupid. Just understandable and possibly sympathetic. It's still not exactly an intelligent decision. Well, more or less depending on your location, but for the people in, say, New Orleans ... yeeaaah.

Spoiler'd for possible rage-inducing comments:

To me, all of a sudden, for New Orleans at least, going back there and proudly living there seems a bit like going back to an abusive spouse. There's some interesting parallels.

...I'm going to get shot now, aren't I?

[Arc Orion]

For those who keep arguing that New Orleans ought to move inland, consider that as a port city, it has much more scope for as an economic and tourist center. An inland city simply would not be as effective in these areas. By continuing to rebuild a city there after such a situation, they're protecting their way of life more than anything else. Obviously, before Katrina, New Orleans was doing pretty well for itself. Do you think it can't do so again?

On top of that, your argument of, "Well, stop moving back there, it's dangerous", completely ignores that just about ANY location has its dangers. Some are certainly lesser, but this doesn't change the fact that a massive earthquake could wipe out the west coast. In fact, every few years, I hear some report on the news about how we're due for a catastrophic earthquake. I have my doubts as the veracity of that claim, but I'm certainly not going to move just because of that. If humans had cowed in fear of every danger we might have run into, we'd never have gotten this far as a species, nor as a global culture. Stop to think of the big picture here here. It's a good thing that people are "stupid" enough to go back to a place they know to be dangerous.

[Deacon]

Obviously, before Katrina, New Orleans was doing pretty well for itself.

Obviously? Please clarify. It was one giant urinal for frat boys and gamblers, full of corruption, generational poverty and crime.

[Arc Orion]

You're right. I said that without actually considering it properly. I should have simply left it at that New Orleans was a major port and tourism center.

[FirebirdNC]

It was one giant urinal for frat boys and gamblers, full of corruption, generational poverty and crime.

So basically a low rent Vegas? I went the year before Katrina hit and giant urinal is one of the things that came to mind when I was walking down bourbon street whew! I did however have some really fabulous food at a couple of off the beaten path eateries that locals recommended. Not a place in all honesty that I would go to again even before the hurricane troubles, but it is certainly not my place to say "Hey you should move".

[ampersand]

The French Quarters was great. Get away from there, and it's not worth sticking around at all, either in the day or night.

The challenge is to make a locale as habitable as possible given all of the potential natural and man-made disasters that are possible. And at this point, New Orleans is failing very badly regardless of how much damage Gustav did. I would not be surprised if by the end, government, private sector, and other entities spend up towards a trillion dollars or more trying to fix the infrastructure problems that will be needed for New Orleans to withstand a serious hurricane threat: at least a Category 3 scale hurricane. In most cases, cities were founded long before the potential natural disaster problems were identified, or if they were, they were minimized by noting how rare they seem to happen. These days, we just know better.

[collegestudent22]

Yes I agree that at some point the government/taxes should not be used. If people choose to stay in a location that has proven time and again to be a hazard then it's on them to help themselves, but don't get on your high horse and declare they are idiots for wanting to live there life where they choose.

Ok..... that isn't what I was saying at all. I wasn't calling their choice of location stupid. I was calling the idea that the government should fix everything when time and time again this will happen. Moving the town inland would at least give them a reason to call on the government for help. This is the second hurricane to hit Louisiana in the last decade.

For a "collegestudent" you don't seem to be opening your mind or broadening your horizons.

I didn't realize college was supposed to be about being indoctrinated into the left. My bad.

Also, I am curious to how the fact that Gustav ripped through the coastal oil refineries/drilling sites without causing any oil to be lost or spilled will affect the offshore drilling debate....