He does make some fairly compelling points re the historical perception of New Orleans vs the economic and demographic reality.
The main thesis is that aside from the “party town” tourist image NO is a mostly a demographic basket case or as the author terms it -
It may not disqualify the author as a pundit, but his understanding of his insurance contract is sadly flawed. He could have spared himself the indignity of replacing now scorned cds, and kept the money. What a putz!
I read an article that argued that part of New Orleans’ problem is that port cities aren’t what they used to be. Ships once required armies of stevedores to load and unload, a process that usually took days. The dock workers needed housing, food and entertainment, and so did the sailors on shore leave waiting for their ships to be ready to sail again. Nowadays cargo container ships and oil tankers are as highly automated as possible, they have fewer sailors, fewer personnel are needed on shore, and the ships are often ready to sail again in hours instead of days. The argument goes that there simply isn’t any particular economic reason anymore for a million people to live at the mouth of the Mississippi river.
Allow me to step into the lion’s den here.
New Orleans will be so changed by recent events that it will never again be what it was before. Predictions it will become some sort of fiberglass tourist haven will come at least partially true. There is not much we can do about that. We have lost a lot to Katrina and nothing can change that.
Nor should we overly try.
What would our reaction be if some midwestern river flooded a city in Nebraska? Why is our emotional reaction to New Orleans much different?
Consider the facts. For complex historical reasons, New Orleans ended up a large city under sea level in a hurricane zone. Why the heck would we want to rebuild such a huge mistake?
New Orleans is particular was (is) a miserable place to live for most people. The economy tanked long ago. Tourism brings with it mostly poorly-paid service jobs. The port no longer kept large numbers busy. Look at the situation of many poor evacuees.
Having little in New Orleans to return to, they see a better life in other cities. How can we persuade them to return to failed schools and high crime and low employment rates? Why should we try?
They, like the nation at large has a blank sheet of paper. Why should we, or they, repeat the mistakes of the past? (As a practical matter how could we force people to return?)
In truth the people most hurt by this disaster were those with the most to lose. Land owners and political leaders who find themselves without a captive population of poor people to fleece. Why do you think Mayor Nagin is so interested in the color of his city in the future?
We cannot recreate New Orleans as it was. The people who were displaced may very well move on and move up elsewhere. The city that will be rebuilt will certainly not be the same.
Good. Maybe we can rebuild it better.
Very well said ! It will be particularly interesting to watch the local politicians try maintain their power and complain when others won’t help them.
If you subscribe to the model of a city life-cycle, New Orleans has died. But cities don’t really die unless enough people move away, thus any talk of New Orleans must now address it’s rebirth, it’s beginning again a** *new * ** cycle.
New Orleans is doomed because it is sinking. You couldn’t pay me to live there.
Large parts of the city are below sea level, and the levees being built to keep out the water are causing the city to sink even faster (and they cause the levees to sink, too). Further, the levees that keep the Mississippi river from flooding are destroying the delta wetlands at an astonishing rate, and these wetlands are needed to protect the city from storm surges. It won’t be too long before New Orleans is a walled-off island in the Gulf of Mexico.
I might consider living there if we contracted out the flood control engineering to the Dutch. They have come up with some creative ways to keep out the sea while working with Mother Nature as much as possible. But even then, I’d have to really think about it first.
Not only that, I’m convinced that sooner or later the Mississippi will break through somewhere above Baton Rouge and find a shorter path to the Gulf. As that tongue of delta extends further and further into the Gulf the upstream pessure will increase until the breakout happens.
Not only that, I’m convinced that sooner or later the Mississippi will break through somewhere above Baton Rouge and find a shorter path to the Gulf. As that tongue of delta containing the river extends further and further into the Gulf the upstream pessure will increase until the breakout happens.
For those who think otherwise, just consider that by far the most of the drainage from Pennsylvania to Wyoming goes out the mouth of the Mississippi. Some spring when there has been a lot of snow in the basins of the Missouri-Ohio-Tennessee-Mississippi and a wet spring with a rapid thaw it will happen.
I think he is right: NO died (economically0 about 40 years ago. take a look at the 9th ward-most of the housing was substandard to begin with. And the “french quarter” nobody has made any repairs to these buildings in 100 years! The port is no longer employing large numbers of people-and the proof is NO’s high 9and persistent) unemployment. Add to the fact: the city is sinking at a rate of 10 ft./century. The Mississippi River is dammed up, and the increase flow at the mouth means that silt is not depositing on the dleta-instead, it gos far out into the gulf. So the marshland and wetlands are eroding away. Simply put: if the private insurance industry won’t write policies in NO. then it makes NO sense to revuil;d it. Moving the people out and allowing them to start new lives is better for everybody.
of course, the local politicians/crooks don’t want to lose their grip-but what do we do if another force 5 hurricane roars in this August-blow another $100 billion?
New Orleans will join the ranks of other lost cities before too long. It is a waste of time and money to try to rebuild it into what it was. I agree with David…it is only a matter of time before the Mississippi Renders the city irrelevant as a port of any importance at all.
I think a substantial minority of the population will refuse to return, or move away within 5 years. Nothing but tourism keeps NO going anyway. Let it die.
There are people other than crooks and politicians who have a stake in the future of the city. There are homeowners, business owners and people whose families have been there for generations. Let’s not be so glib when we say “let it die”.
If we are to allow NO to go the way of the Dodo then we need to consider where, and how, its residents are going to leave and start again.
Cite?
*And there’s another reason why scientists worry more about hurricanes every single year. There’s always been a huge natural buffer that helps protect New Orleans from storms. There are miles of wetlands between here and the Gulf of Mexico: they slow hurricanes down as they blow in from the sea. But that buffer is disappearing. Every year, a chunk of wetlands the size of Manhattan crumbles and turns into open water.
Joe Suhayda explains, “So the hurricane can move closer to the city before it starts to decrease. So in effect, the city is moving closer to the Gulf as each year goes by.”
And he says, it’s partly because of those levees along the Mississippi River. When they stopped the river from flooding, they also prevented the wetlands from getting the regular doses of floodwater and mud that they need to survive. Studies show that if the wetlands keep vanishing over the next few decades, then you won’t need a giant storm to devastate New Orleans — a much weaker, more common kind of hurricane could destroy the city too.*
From here, dated 2002.
Silenus: Thanks. I owe you one. My source was an MSNBC documentary a few months ago, so you saved me some serious google time. If anyone gets a chance to see that documentary (can’t remember the name), I highly recommend it. It’s an eye openner.
really, isn’t what ahppened to new orleans an enditement on most major urban cities?
one (very) bad calamity can do horrible things. i think that the problem is that we haven’t invested enough (manpower, resources, and ideas) into keeping progress going. (note that the term “progress” as used here, has a very broad definition. feel free to substitute “progress” with terms like “prosperity”, “safety”, even “status quo” might work)
New Orleans is no where near the mouth of the Mississippi River.
no.
Well, it’s going to be even less near the mouth of the Mississippi River when the river changes course to the Atchafalaya. This is only a matter of time, one extremely heavy spring melt and New Orleans isn’t on the Mississippi River anymore. Flood problem solved.
