njlauren
Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: BitYakin
For example, Alabama points out that when the big floods hit the midwest, that people in California chided people for living in a flood plane, and it is the pot calling the kettle black. What he left out is that the federal government, thanks to pressure from both congressmen in that area and the river shipping industry, had the army corps of engineers reroute the mississippi, both to make it more navigable, and also ironically to reduce flooding in certain areas to make them more attractive to build houses..and what happened was they created an even bigger mess (by moving the river, they took away the natural means of the river to handle high water, and all the levees in the world won't stop it). Since then they have bought out people in the area they stupidly allowed to live there, and have let the river go back to more its natural banks.
I'd sure like to see some documentation of these claims, I have lived in st Louis for aprox 50 years.
fact is the flood you are referring to was a FREAK OF NATURE, the area you refer to being bought out had that happen all of THAT ONE TIME even though people had been living there for over 200 years
as for them letting the river go back to is more NATURAL course, where did you get THAT FROM?
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2003-07-07/news/0307070177_1_higher-ground-valmeyer-great-flood
Which trumps the firsthand knowledge of those of us who have actually lived on the river.
Another source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valmeyer,_Illinois
And still you would think firsthand knowledge would count for more, but I guess not in your world.
Firsthand knowledge is a funny thing, because it isn't always more accurate than things that come out of the fact. Eyewitness testimony to events is often all over the place in terms of accuracy, and people often report their perceptions rather than facts. You claim first hand knowledge, but the mississippi flood plain is huge and how big a region do you or others claiming first hand knowledge know? Maybe 20, 30 miles? I have heard the same thing from people telling me they don't get anything from the federal government, that they and the fellow citizens of the state not only pay for what they get, but they also subsidize everyone else (usually very true in rural and farm areas, that love to claim they are hard individualists when statistics show otherwise). What I am seeing from posters on here is pretty much what I would expect, they know these areas, have people who live there, and don't want to face the reality. People who live in the towns I mentioned in NJ have the same kind of thinking, they claim that it would be okay to live there if the government had done this, hadn't done that, when the reality is, the towns and housing should never have been allowed in the first place. In your case, it is that the storm was a freak storm, that there hasn't been any major flooding since then, or if they just made the levees bigger everything would be okay. THe problem with first hand accounts is they often are biased, those living on barrier islands and on the coast will say that it isn't so bad, that the risks aren't high, meanwhile 1.5 years after sandy large swaths of the NJ shore still have not been rebuilt, the devastation was that bad.
|
RE: Tragedy foretold but ignored - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread