Why should we give NY 60Billion for Hurricane victims?

[lotus503]

These are for repair/protection/hardening of the listed items, entirely related to the disaster.

So we're really looking at 500M ish of pork (less than 1%).

Just throwing a ton fo dirt of the problem woudl help and be far elss costly.

Your probably not going to have a bad storm for a long time, do you really need fed money to actually make things better for the next time?

/sarcasm

 

[piasabird]

This is a gravy train.

 

[michal1980]

These are for repair/protection/hardening of the listed items, entirely related to the disaster.

So we're really looking at 500M ish of pork (less than 1%).

the list itself says its for stuff not related to the disaster.

What alternate reality do you live in?

 

[K1052]

the list itself says its for stuff not related to the disaster.

What alternate reality do you live in?

And it's pretty much only posted on hack right wing sites...hmm

That funding is for upgrades to assets impacted by the storm so that another storm doesn't come along and re-do the same exact damage which will then have to be paid for again. THIS. IS. COMMON. PRACTICE. New Orleans is sporting $15B worth of brand new and stronger flood control for this same reason.

If you can find an itemized breakdown (not vague categories) of that pork spending I'd take a look but in the absence of specifics I am not the least bit inclined to swallow a claim that $25B of the bill is pork.

 

[Daverino]

And it's pretty much only posted on hack right wing sites...hmm

That funding is for upgrades to assets impacted by the storm so that another storm doesn't come along and re-do the same exact damage which will then have to be paid for again. THIS. IS. COMMON. PRACTICE. New Orleans is sporting $15B worth of brand new and stronger flood control for this same reason.

If you can find an itemized breakdown (not vague categories) of that pork spending I'd take a look but in the absence of specifics I am not the least bit inclined to swallow a claim that $25B of the bill is pork.

Yup, that's pretty much it. There's maybe $500 million of true pork in this bill. But the current talking point is that anything which isn't going to be spent immediately is pork. So they pretend that it's a pork bill.

The really sad thing is that the talking point had to be invented because of the Boehner - Cantor cat fight we saw on Tuesday. The bill has bipartisan support as is and would pass easily. But then Boehner pulled his dick move and this is the cover story to help Republicans feel good about what was, basically, using disaster relief as a political toy. Had Cantor supported Boehner on the cliff deal we would not be having this discussion. The bill would have sailed through the House.

But that didn't happen and now the right-wing pundits need to justify why the bill wasn't passed without saying the real reason: Boehner was being an asshole.

 

[michal1980]

And it's pretty much only posted on hack right wing sites...hmm

That funding is for upgrades to assets impacted by the storm so that another storm doesn't come along and re-do the same exact damage which will then have to be paid for again. THIS. IS. COMMON. PRACTICE. New Orleans is sporting $15B worth of brand new and stronger flood control for this same reason.

If you can find an itemized breakdown (not vague categories) of that pork spending I'd take a look but in the absence of specifics I am not the least bit inclined to swallow a claim that $25B of the bill is pork.

because the lmsm based in new york is going to try to taint the pork for their hometown. LOL

 

[michal1980]

And it's pretty much only posted on hack right wing sites...hmm

That funding is for upgrades to assets impacted by the storm so that another storm doesn't come along and re-do the same exact damage which will then have to be paid for again. THIS. IS. COMMON. PRACTICE. New Orleans is sporting $15B worth of brand new and stronger flood control for this same reason.

If you can find an itemized breakdown (not vague categories) of that pork spending I'd take a look but in the absence of specifics I am not the least bit inclined to swallow a claim that $25B of the bill is pork.

your not because your all for it.

Those stronger flood controls work only until a bigger storm comes along. So your going to spend billions of dollars on a once in a 100 year event, which them might be even bigger and rendered your billions of dollars wasted.

or save billions today, and use to rebuild 100 years from now.

 

[fskimospy]

your not because your all for it.

Those stronger flood controls work only until a bigger storm comes along. So your going to spend billions of dollars on a once in a 100 year event, which them might be even bigger and rendered your billions of dollars wasted.

or save billions today, and use to rebuild 100 years from now.

I would remind you that climate change and rising seas make this likely to happen again considerably sooner than that, but something tells me you're a climate change denier on top of all this.

 

[K1052]

I would remind you that climate change and rising seas make this likely to happen again considerably sooner than that, but something tells me you're a climate change denier on top of all this.

Ding.

Particularly if such a storm hits at an unfavorable tide like Sandy did.

The most cost effective solution will end up being sea barriers, at $20-$40B it would have even been a relative bargain to avoid much of the damage just caused by Sandy.

 

[michal1980]

Ding.

Particularly if such a storm hits at an unfavorable tide like Sandy did.

The most cost effective solution will end up being sea barriers, at $20-$40B it would have even been a relative bargain to avoid much of the damage just caused by Sandy.

what happens when your barriers are too short for the next storm?

 

[Abraxas]

what happens when your barriers are too short for the next storm?

What happens when a gunman aims for your head instead of your vest? What happens when your brakes fail? And what happens when your condom tears?

Are you honestly arguing from the position that just because no safety measure is foolproof that we should just leave ourselves completely vulnerable and make no effort to protect ourselves from foreseeable disasters at all? That would be a new record in stupid if you were.

 

[Howard]

what happens when your barriers are too short for the next storm?

What happens if Godzilla comes? You're fucked!

 

[Matt1970]

These are for repair/protection/hardening of the listed items, entirely related to the disaster.

So we're really looking at 500M ish of pork (less than 1%).

Unless you plan on building a 10 foot wall around NY City it’s going to flood again with the next storm like that. Most of NY City is all of 5 feet above sea level and the subways are below sea level.
Are you going to tell the architects and engineers already have plans together for infrastructure improvements to prevent damage from future storms? Bullshit.

 

[DCal430]

Ding.

Particularly if such a storm hits at an unfavorable tide like Sandy did.

The most cost effective solution will end up being sea barriers, at $20-$40B it would have even been a relative bargain to avoid much of the damage just caused by Sandy.

Japan spent countless billions building walls to protect them from a Tsunami, little good it did. Even with the wall the damage was in the hundreds of billions of US Dollars, and if you include the cost of the nuclear accident it will be over half a trillion dollars. FYI the nuclear plant had a costly sea wall around it too, what good did it do.

Tens of billions spent on a sea walls, 20,000 still dead, and over 500 Billion USD in damages. You see when they built those walls they assumed maximum size of earthquake and tsunami that could strike, and they assumed wrong. That is what will happen in NY. They will build a wall, assuming 25 feet storm surge, and instead of massive storm will bring a 35 feet one, and make the barrier useless.

 

[werepossum]

Just a couple of notes before the outrage gets too out of hand:

1) FEMA does not give money to individuals. In a limited number of cases individuals may get loans or living assistance (the dreaded FEMA trailer) but the federal government does not pay to rebuild homes;
2) The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was reupped this year for 5 years as part of the Biggert-Waters Act. Part of the Act was making the NFIP actuarially-sound. Expect flood premiums to go up at least 25% over the next several years.
3) Most federal disaster relief goes to states and municipalities for the repair of those things that cannot be commercially or privately insured. (Think infrastructure) It's not that New York declined to insure the subway system it's that no insurer in their right mind would issue a policy on a risk like that.

That sounds perfectly reasonable. I'd bet money we're talking at least 1/3 pork though - this IS the federal government.

 

[K1052]

Japan spent countless billions building walls to protect them from a Tsunami, little good it did. Even with the wall the damage was in the hundreds of billions of US Dollars, and if you include the cost of the nuclear accident it will be over half a trillion dollars. FYI the nuclear plant had a costly sea wall around it too, what good did it do.

Tens of billions spent on a sea walls, 20,000 still dead, and over 500 Billion USD in damages. You see when they built those walls they assumed maximum size of earthquake and tsunami that could strike, and they assumed wrong. That is what will happen in NY. They will build a wall, assuming 25 feet storm surge, and instead of massive storm will bring a 35 feet one, and make the barrier useless.

The eastern seaboard is not a major tsunami zone. The range of realistic risk we are looking at is far narrower than what the Japanese had to consider and the mechanisms and effects are not at all similar. Height of the barrier(s) hasn't been determined yet either. The claim that this is impossible to protect against from an engineering standpoint is totally false. The Dutch have built and used far more massive flood control works for decades with great success (savings in lives and property).

 

[michal1980]

The eastern seaboard is not a major tsunami zone. The range of realistic risk we are looking at is far narrower than what the Japanese had to consider and the mechanisms and effects are not at all similar. Height of the barrier(s) hasn't been determined yet either. The claim that this is impossible to protect against from an engineering standpoint is totally false. The Dutch have built and used far more massive flood control works for decades with great success (savings in lives and property).

talk about hubris.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The eastern seaboard is not a major tsunami zone. The range of realistic risk we are looking at is far narrower than what the Japanese had to consider and the mechanisms and effects are not at all similar. Height of the barrier(s) hasn't been determined yet either. The claim that this is impossible to protect against from an engineering standpoint is totally false. The Dutch have built and used far more massive flood control works for decades with great success (savings in lives and property).

Being just plan stupid is so common now days . Its alright to live your life in this manner.

I will assume you do not believe in god. Which is fine . Whats not smart is calling this a once in a life time event. It will come back and bite you in the ass. I can't believe so many believe this . If Sandy had a lesson to it . It was this . Don't rebuild . If I was a betting man . I would say A bigger badder sandy comes next season. Call it Sandy II. You would say the odds of that are a billion to1. About the same as the Vikings making the playoffs.

 

[Throckmorton]

Shouldn't the government agencies who own those subway and train systems have their own insurance?

Why should the taxpayers of the USA be responsible for the costs of irresponsible government agencies?

Is that even possible? What insurance company would insure a whole subway system??

 

[Abraxas]

Japan spent countless billions building walls to protect them from a Tsunami, little good it did. Even with the wall the damage was in the hundreds of billions of US Dollars, and if you include the cost of the nuclear accident it will be over half a trillion dollars. FYI the nuclear plant had a costly sea wall around it too, what good did it do.

Tens of billions spent on a sea walls, 20,000 still dead, and over 500 Billion USD in damages. You see when they built those walls they assumed maximum size of earthquake and tsunami that could strike, and they assumed wrong. That is what will happen in NY. They will build a wall, assuming 25 feet storm surge, and instead of massive storm will bring a 35 feet one, and make the barrier useless.

I'll ask you the same thing, are you arguing that because we might get a 35 foot storm surge, we should do nothing to protect our infrastructure and so we should leave ourselves vulnerable to the 25 foot storm surge as well?

Yes, when a 35 foot storm surge hits a system only designed to handle 25 may not do enough, but what you are ignoring is all the 25s and under it would be stopping in the mean time. Unless your position is unless we can stop everything we shouldn't bother stopping anything, your position is incoherent.

 

[BoomerD]

Is that even possible? What insurance company would insure a whole subway system??

Then self-insure...but don't expect the taxpayers across the country to pay for your short-sightedness in design/construction of infrastructure. Why should taxpayers in Wyoming, for example, have to pay to rebuild the NYC subway system?

 

[Abraxas]

Then self-insure...but don't expect the taxpayers across the country to pay for your short-sightedness in design/construction of infrastructure. Why should taxpayers in Wyoming, for example, have to pay to rebuild the NYC subway system?

Because their tax dollars would be used to repair your infrastructure in the event you had an earthquake or a volcano or tornado or flood or some other event that you were unable to adequately prepare for. Part of the advantage of living in a federal system is they'll cover your ass when you cover theirs.

 

[DCal430]

I'll ask you the same thing, are you arguing that because we might get a 35 foot storm surge, we should do nothing to protect our infrastructure and so we should leave ourselves vulnerable to the 25 foot storm surge as well?

Yes, when a 35 foot storm surge hits a system only designed to handle 25 may not do enough, but what you are ignoring is all the 25s and under it would be stopping in the mean time. Unless your position is unless we can stop everything we shouldn't bother stopping anything, your position is incoherent.

Ok, lets say I agree we should build something, but why should this area get protection first. There are other areas in the U.S in far greater danger of of catastrophic flooding, why is this area being given higher priority. California in particular, if a repeat of the 1862 storm happens, estimate puts the cost at 750 billions dollars with millions of homes destroyed. California is in huge danger, and they levies here are not designed to protect against such storm. In fact California is likely in greater danger of this storm is then NY is of a repeat of sandy.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

I'll ask you the same thing, are you arguing that because we might get a 35 foot storm surge, we should do nothing to protect our infrastructure and so we should leave ourselves vulnerable to the 25 foot storm surge as well?

Yes, when a 35 foot storm surge hits a system only designed to handle 25 may not do enough, but what you are ignoring is all the 25s and under it would be stopping in the mean time. Unless your position is unless we can stop everything we shouldn't bother stopping anything, your position is incoherent.

That exactly what he's saying. And, as the US could clearly not defend itself against an attack like the one on 9/11 there's no reason whatsoever for the US to have any kind of military either. Imagine how much lower the taxes can be when you abolish that!

 

[monovillage]

I would remind you that climate change and rising seas make this likely to happen again considerably sooner than that, but something tells me you're a climate change denier on top of all this.

Liar, as usual for you.
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2012/12/updated-normalized-hurricane-losses.html