An Idea....Let's Not Rebuild Galveston

[rsmith6621]

.....After all I'm sure many in Galveston said the same about NOLA after Katrina....:nuke: :shrug: :cry: :eyes:

[yourout]

1. Way to many Republican voters there to not rebuild.

[lastliberalintexas]

10. Shows how little you know of Galveston

But thanks for the commentary. I'm sure being the liberal that you are, you are on your way down here to help with the rescue and recovery, right?

[yourout]

14. I admit I am ignorant of the political leanings of Galveston.

It was meant as more of a jab at the current administration in the White House.

Sorry if I insulted anyone in an obviously tragic time.

[Hugabear]

2. WTF

Why would you assume that?

[jkshaw]

3. It's only sarcasm

[rsmith6621]

6. Many Said Nationwide after Katrina

[Bluebear]

4. How does one even begin to answer?

[lastliberalintexas]

12. By saying fuck off?

Works for me, anyway. This thread almost made me wish I wasn't one of the lucky 12 to have electricity. :eyes:



(not you and some of the other responders, though)

[Bluebear]

13. That says it.

[Codeine]

18. You're missing the sarcasm.

The OP is merely underscoring the fact that nobody in the media is seriously suggesting this, while it was regularly bandied about in Katrina's wake.

[lastliberalintexas]

21. The OP discusses Galveston residents, not the media

Yep, biting satrcasm indeed.

[tularetom]

5. This ain't Galveston's first rodeo

Check this site:

http://www.randomhouse.com/features/isaacsstorm/

Maybe it never shoulda been rebuilt 108 years ago.

[panader0]

7. People are free to live where they like

So far.

[ShenandoahAspen]

15. Exactly.

And if people want to live on a barrier island very vulnerable to hurricanes, let them. It isn't for me, though -- I always wanted to visit Galveston, but never live there.
Ultimately, it is up to the citizens of Galveston whether they want their town rebuilt or not. After this, I think many of them will decide to move elsewhere.

[JVS]

8. Suits me.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KT2000]

11. Global Warming

is on its way and we better plan for it.
The barrier islands will likely not exist in the near future.

[SoCalDem]

16. There actually is a reason those little strips of shifting sand are called barrier islands

they absorb the surge of hurricanes, thus protecting the coastlines..

All that needs to happen is for insurance to be unavailable for building on them.. If people are ready to assume total responsibility, let them rebuild.. pretty soon those barrier islands would be what they were supposed to be.. stopping over spots for wildlife, and protection for the coastline..

and before anyone gets all snotty with me, I feel the same way about the Calif coast and the dangerous fire-canyons :)

[alarimer]

17. I agree

I know too much about them to ever live on a barrier island. Hurricanes are a guaranteed disaster. They happen nearly every year and repeatedly to the same areas. The northern Gulf seems to be especially prone, at least based on historical record. The problem is that it has been a long time since the last one and people have short memories and a LOT of denial. In the meantime, so much development has occurred that storms are more costly every year. I favor moving some of these communities farther inland where possible and then allowing the islands to perform their natural functions.

I worry a little bit that they will call for extending the seawall because it seemed to protect the downtown area fairly well. The problem with this is that seawalls cause greater erosion.

[lastliberalintexas]

20. Unless you forbid habitation until 30 miles inland, it wouldn't make a difference

Galveston was not the only place impacted by Ike, there are a number of smaller coastal communities which have been absolutely destroyed by this storm. They are not barrier island communities, but are coastal.

I agree that it's probably not a good idea to build right on the beach, but hurricanes don't stop there. I lived 30 miles inland when Rita hit and still had 3 trees through my roof. A friend of mine who lives 20 miles inland has a tree in her living room right now. And some of my family who live 100 miles inland had a tree fall in their yard, but thankfully miss the house. Moving inland a little would help alleviate the surge, but it still doesn't guarantee that your house won't flood. :shrug:

[SoCalDem]

22. True, anyplace can flood, BUT you have to admit that

it's easier to get out of harm's way if you do not have only one way in/one way out (as so many island/peninsula areas have)..and there is probably a lot more high ground when you get inland..even a few miles..

I can only really relate to my own personal experiences, but there is also an aesthtic value to "wild" coastlines that are truly shared by everyone, and not "staked out" by individuals. It's a pretty cool experience to be able to drive along a coastline, be able to pull off the road, climb down the embankment, and walk on a beach or climb on the rocks.. That should be available to all people..not just the few who can afford a patch of sand and plop down a house..

The "development" of coastlines, leads to erosion, which necessitates tax-money for all of us, for "beach sand replenishment", and then seawalls to protect the precarious real estate.. Seawalls protect what's behind it, but that wall directs the water crashing into it, down the wall and piles it up, poised to pound someone else's patch of beach, and/or house..

Beaches/sandbars are meant to shift and move, but man tries to make them stationary, because of what they want to build on them..

If you go to "primitive" areas of the world, you'll notice that the "locals/old-timers" usually built their living quarters , away from the water's edge. they use the beach areas for fishing, recreation/ washing, but they don't actually LIVE on the beach.

There's nothing wrong with building temporary (CHEAP and expendable) places on beaches, but anything intended to be permanent (costly), are always subject to nature's wrath..

[bullwinkle428]

26. We need to have politicians in power with the GUTS to stand up

and say "NO BUILDING" of permanent residential structures on these little barrier islands (I'm not including Galveston). However, the greed-merchant real estate developers of the corporatocracy seem to hold all of the cards these days, and can push their Alfred E. Newmanesque message of "WHAT? ME WORRY?", in an effort to reassure potential buyers that nothing bad could ever possibly happen to them!!

I live in Iowa, very close to where much of that horrible flooding occurred this year - I just couldn't believe that developers were allowed to build residences in some of the spots where the worst flooding occurred!! :argh:

[SoCalDem]

27. When we lived in Kansas, we had to pay extra for homeowners insurnace

even though we lived NOWHERE near ANY river..but the USGS maps our town used, shows that we were in fact in some "ancient" floodplain..Their motto.. better safe than sorry.. The BANK made us take on the additional insurance.. The odd part, the people across the street were just out of the floodplain , so their rates were less:)

[uppityperson]

19. SARCASTIC OP, for those who didn't get it.

And about (___) after fires and (___) after earthquake...

[SoCalDem]

23. Sarcasm often has truth to it :)

and some disasters can be predicted..others cannot..

No one knows when, or where mother nature will try to buck a few of us off, via earthquake, but fires in fire-prone canyons CAN be predicted, as can recurring/yearly/cyclical hurricanes along our eastern/gulf coasts.

Tornado SEASON is predictible too, but the swath of land in peril encompasses too much geography to "avoid" the remote possibility that your particular house/property migth be hit..

Nature give no one a "pass", and every area has risks, but it's also up to humans to try and mitigate the risks, once known :)

[uppityperson]

29. True. I am tired of posters who cannot see the difference between

saying "omg look at that destruction" and "boohoo my house is gone poor me how ever could that have happened". Not you, but just ranting here.

ed for typo "true" not "trus"

[ColoradoMagician]

24. Nah, you have to rebuild...

and re-record the song. I think they should do it in an upbeat, with lots of electric guitar.

[El Pinko]

25. Why would you assume that about Galvestonians?

I don't think it's a particularly callous or right-wing town, and it was utterly destroyed by a hurricane in 1900. You may have heard such nonsense in flyover country, but along the gulf coast? Not so much.


That being said, Galveston is a SAND BAR. There should be a huge sign on the bridge going over that says "this city is destroyed by hurricanes an average of once a century. live here at your own risk."

Same goes for New Orleans. Maybe anything on the Gulf Coast that's less than 5 ft elevation and less than 1/4 mile from the shoreline should be redlined as far as insurance. It really doesn't seem a wise place to settle.

You can say what you want about tornado alley or earthquake country, but the barrier islands of the Gulf coast are unique in that the likelihood that they will be inundated is much, much higher than the risks in other areas.

My heart goes out to Galveston. I grew up as a little kid in Beaumont and used to go to the beach there in the summers, and went back again in the 90s - it was a charming town. But whether it's Miami Beach, South Padre Island or any of the other barrier islands, there is no way to make them truly safe for long-term habitation.

[tannybogus]

28. I'm sure they won't until

developers can get the locals to sell and then they will build expensive condos etc. there.The developers probably have friends in government who will tie up everything
in red tape until the end of time. Then again, they may not have to know anybody. It will just naturally get bogged down.