|
The original city - the French Quarter, Garden District, and much of Uptown -is considerably higher and did not flood.
Also, much of the flooding was caused by - or, inarguably, made worse by - human causes: poorly constructed levees, the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, and the oil industry's brutalization of LA's coastal wetlands. The erosion of our natural barriers and the poor construction of the levees made this far worse than it otherwise would have been. Note that what happened in New Orleans was not a result of a very strong storm - we did not see worst of Katrina, the Mississippi coast and SE Louisiana did - but the result of levee failure.
I know the region's image has taken a huge hit by the scale of the corruption (it's always been here, now that it's being rooted out more effectively it's getting lots of coverage) and by the images of the worst of NOLA's citizenry during and after storm - looting WalMarts and wailing at FEMA.
I DO think that the local communities need to do far more. I also think that all levels of government need to spend the dollars to fix the city - and do so efficiently .
That involves having a reasonable, limited plan for recovery, the appointment of a federal "recovery czar", and a clear division of local responsibility and federal contribution.
What happened after the storm was a total collapse of governmental responsibly, as is the grossly lagging recovery progress. To suggest that the solution is to stop investing in the area, as the original poster did, pisses me off. The solution is to fix the problem.
When the problem is that when the destruction of a major American city and the surrounding region is followed by five days of inaction while people die by the hundreds, it is NOT JUST A LOCAL PROBLEM. And if you think that gumbo and crawfish is the extent of the regions national contribution, then you're an idiot.
|