$200 Billion - Open Your Wallet Alert

[Qwackertoo]

This is really going to cost us big time~!

http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2005/09/what-to-do-about-new-orleans

[Charade]

I heard that on the radio today. This should make for great debate foder.

[Puffy2]

And our republican senator from Georgia, Johnny Isakson, says that:

even in the wake of Katrina, "it would be a mistake to turn our backs on the extraordinary economic growth of the past two years by abandoning all tax cuts. I feel very strongly that we should continue our nation's unprecedented economic prosperity by making the tax cuts permanent." Atlanta Journal and Consititution.


Just where does this senator think the 200 Billion is going to come from?

I guess there will be "economic prosperity" for some... ie., Haliburton and other major contributors to the Bush Administration who has already won no -bid contracts to "clean up New Orleans"...all while congress has removed the wage requirments for the workers that these companies will use to do the job.

Something still smells in New Orleans and it's not coming from the tainted water or bodies.

[DawnCt1]

You do realize that when taxes are cut, economic growth is generated and more tax revenues flow into the US coffers, don't you? No, I guess you don't.

[Charade]

You do realize that when taxes are cut, economic growth is generated and more tax revenues flow into the US coffers, don't you? No, I guess you don't.

Some people don't realize that our ecomony is mostly based on consumer spending. When cosumers have less to spend, tax revenues drop unless you increase taxes which in turn gives them less to spend unless they get a pay raise. That only happens when the company they work for increases their profits from selling more products/services. That can't happen if they don't sell more products or services. It's a vicious cycle and requires a balance to work well for everyone.

[BuckNaked]

I guess there will be "economic prosperity" for some... ie., Haliburton and other major contributors to the Bush Administration who has already won no -bid contracts to "clean up New Orleans"...


I guess there are no companies controlled by Democrats that got multi-million dollar no-bid contracts...oh wait, what was that one? Shaw something or other?

[DawnCt1]

Just where does this senator think the 200 Billion is going to come from?

I guess there will be "economic prosperity" for some... ie., Haliburton and other major contributors to the Bush Administration who has already won no -bid contracts to "clean up New Orleans"...all while congress has removed the wage requirments for the workers that these companies will use to do the job.

Something still smells in New Orleans and it's not coming from the tainted water or bodies.

Lets see. It sounds like you have some concern about the "price tag", and yet when an attempt is made to make the process more affordable for the companies and ultimately the tax payer, you are complaining.

[Planogirl]

Some people don't realize that our ecomony is mostly based on consumer spending. When cosumers have less to spend, tax revenues drop unless you increase taxes which in turn gives them less to spend unless they get a pay raise. That only happens when the company they work for increases their profits from selling more products/services. That can't happen if they don't sell more products or services. It's a vicious cycle and requires a balance to work well for everyone.
With an expensive war and storm to deal with, this is not a balanced situation.

[Puffy2]

Again - how do you think we as a nation will pay for it all? where is the money going to come from?

[Puffy2]

This is an interesting opinion piece on the issue of reconstruction:

"Disaster Capitalism
In New Orleans
By Xymphora
9-13-5

"The implications of FEMA's 'incompetence' and Bush's inexplicable failure to do anything about the plight of New Orleans until it was too late become rather obvious. Competence just leads to fewer chances to make money. ... At the same time, 'undesirable' populations ... can be cleaned up."


The cost (or here) of cleaning up the results of Bush's negligence in failing to deal with global warming and spending money needed for New Orleans levees on his war in Iraq may be as much as the $300 billion spent in four years to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course, what most people would regard as a cost, the entrepreneurial politicians in the Bush White House see as yet another opportunity to transfer money from taxpayers to their personal friends. The scheme is blatantly obvious:

Bush has started to issue Iraq-style no-bid contracts, with cost-plus provisions that guarantee contractors a certain profit regardless of how much they spend.

Old buddies like Halliburton, Bechtel, and Fluor are first in line. Joe Allbaugh, the former director of FEMA, is lobbying for Halliburton, and another winner of the Katrina windfall, Shaw Group Inc.

In order to increase profitability at the expense of the working people most affected by the hurricane and thus most in need of money, Bush has removed (or here) federal minimum-wage provisions from the reconstruction contracts.

The concept of 'disaster capitalism', a term coined by Naomi Klein, is now being applied to the United States itself.

Klein wrote:

"Last summer, in the lull of the August media doze, the Bush Administration's doctrine of preventive war took a major leap forward. On August 5, 2004, the White House created the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, headed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual. Its mandate is to draw up elaborate 'post-conflict' plans for up to twenty-five countries that are not, as of yet, in conflict. According to Pascual, it will also be able to coordinate three full-scale reconstruction operations in different countries 'at the same time,' each lasting 'five to seven years.'

and (note that Halliburton had a 'pre-completed' contract for New Orleans):

"Gone are the days of waiting for wars to break out and then drawing up ad hoc plans to pick up the pieces. In close cooperation with the National Intelligence Council, Pascual's office keeps 'high risk' countries on a 'watch list' and assembles rapid-response teams ready to engage in prewar planning and to 'mobilize and deploy quickly' after a conflict has gone down. The teams are made up of private companies, nongovernmental organizations and members of think tanks - some, Pascual told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in October, will have 'pre-completed' contracts to rebuild countries that are not yet broken. Doing this paperwork in advance could 'cut off three to six months in your response time.'"

and:

"But if the reconstruction industry is stunningly inept at rebuilding, that may be because rebuilding is not its primary purpose. According to Guttal, 'It's not reconstruction at all - it's about reshaping everything.' If anything, the stories of corruption and incompetence serve to mask this deeper scandal: the rise of a predatory form of disaster capitalism that uses the desperation and fear created by catastrophe to engage in radical social and economic engineering. And on this front, the reconstruction industry works so quickly and efficiently that the privatizations and land grabs are usually locked in before the local population knows what hit them. Kumara, in another e-mail, warns that Sri Lanka is now facing 'a second tsunami of corporate globalization and militarization,' potentially even more devastating than the first. 'We see this as a plan of action amidst the tsunami crisis to hand over the sea and the coast to foreign corporations and tourism, with military assistance from the US Marines.'"

and:

"A group calling itself Thailand Tsunami Survivors and Supporters says that for 'businessmen-politicians, the tsunami was the answer to their prayers, since it literally wiped these coastal areas clean of the communities which had previously stood in the way of their plans for resorts, hotels, casinos and shrimp farms. To them, all these coastal areas are now open land!'"

Just like New Orleans! If the Bush Administration has elaborate pre-made plans to make money off conflicts which have yet to occur in other countries, why would they not also have elaborate pre-made plans to make money off natural disasters that occur within the United States? A book of plans for New Orleans, a book of plans for Florida, a book of plans for San Francisco . . the money to be made is enormous! The implications of FEMA's 'incompetence' and Bush's inexplicable failure to do anything about the plight of New Orleans until it was too late become rather obvious. Competence just leads to fewer chances to make money. All of the reconstruction contracts can be directed to friends of the Bush Administration, and no one will complain about the extremely generous payments. At the same time, 'undesirable' populations - blacks in New Orleans, gays in San Francisco - can be cleaned up, thus ensuring that the area will vote Republican in the future.

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/ "

[snappy]

I guess there are no companies controlled by Democrats that got multi-million dollar no-bid contracts...oh wait, what was that one? Shaw something or other?

Shaw is advertising here on the radio trying to fill a number of new job positions already. I just heard that they are hosting a career fair this Saturday for engineering, project control and accounting jobs at their corporate office here. Lots of new opportunities from the sounds of it.

[Puffy2]

And here is more info from news source CNN:


"Firms with White House ties get Katrina contracts
FEMA taps Halliburton subsidiary, Shaw Group, Bechtel for cleanup

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Companies with ties to the Bush White House and the former head of FEMA are clinching some of the administration's first disaster relief and reconstruction contracts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

At least two major corporate clients of lobbyist Joe Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and a former head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, have already been tapped to start recovery work along the battered Gulf Coast.

One is Shaw Group Inc. and the other is Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root. Vice President Dick Cheney is a former head of Halliburton.

Bechtel National Inc., a unit of San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp., has also been selected by FEMA to provide short-term housing for people displaced by the hurricane. Bush named Bechtel's CEO to his Export Council and put the former CEO of Bechtel Energy in charge of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

Experts say it has been common practice in both Republican and Democratic administrations for policy makers to take lobbying jobs once they leave office, and many of the same companies seeking contracts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina have already received billions of dollars for work in Iraq.

Halliburton alone has earned more than $9 billion. Pentagon audits released by Democrats in June showed $1.03 billion in "questioned" costs and $422 million in "unsupported" costs for Halliburton's work in Iraq.

Watchdog groups take notice
But the web of Bush administration connections is attracting renewed attention from watchdog groups in the post-Katrina reconstruction rush. Congress has already appropriated more than $60 billion in emergency funding as a down payment on recovery efforts projected to cost well over $100 billion.

"The government has got to stop stacking senior positions with people who are repeatedly cashing in on the public trust in order to further private commercial interests," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight.

Bush appointees at Halliburton
Allbaugh formally registered as a lobbyist for Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root in February.

In lobbying disclosure forms filed with the Senate, Allbaugh said his goal was to "educate the congressional and executive branch on defense, disaster relief and homeland security issues affecting Kellogg Brown and Root."

Melissa Norcross, a Halliburton spokeswoman, said Allbaugh has not, since he was hired, "consulted on any specific contracts that the company is considering pursuing, nor has he been tasked by the company with any lobbying responsibilities."

Allbaugh is also a friend of Michael Brown, director of FEMA who was removed as head of Katrina disaster relief and sent back to Washington amid allegations he had padded his resume -- which he denies.

A few months after Allbaugh was hired by Halliburton, the company retained another high-level Bush appointee, Kirk Van Tine.

Van Tine registered as a lobbyist for Halliburton six months after resigning as deputy transportation secretary, a position he held from December 2003 to December 2004.

On Friday, Kellogg Brown & Root received $29.8 million in Pentagon contracts to begin rebuilding Navy bases in Louisiana and Mississippi. Norcross said the work was covered under a contract that the company negotiated before Allbaugh was hired.

Cheney's relationship with Halliburton
Halliburton continues to be a source of income for Cheney, who served as its chief executive officer from 1995 until 2000 when he joined the Republican ticket for the White House. According to tax filings released in April, Cheney's income included $194,852 in deferred pay from the company, which has also won billion-dollar government contracts in Iraq.

Cheney's office said the amount of deferred compensation is fixed and is not affected by Halliburton's current economic performance or earnings.

Allbaugh's other major client, Baton Rouge-based Shaw Group, has updated its Web site to say: "Hurricane Recovery Projects -- Apply Here!"

Shaw said on Thursday it has received a $100 million emergency FEMA contract for housing management and construction. Shaw also clinched a $100 million order on Friday from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Shaw Group spokesman Chris Sammons said Allbaugh was providing the company with "general consulting on business matters," and would not say whether he played a direct role in any of the Katrina deals. "We don't comment on specific consulting activities," he said. "


http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/10/katrina.contracts.reut

[DawnCt1]

This is an interesting opinion piece on the issue of reconstruction:

If the Bush Administration has elaborate pre-made plans to make money off conflicts which have yet to occur in other countries, why would they not also have elaborate pre-made plans to make money off natural disasters that occur within the United States? A book of plans for New Orleans, a book of plans for Florida, a book of plans for San Francisco . . the money to be made is enormous! The implications of FEMA's 'incompetence' and Bush's inexplicable failure to do anything about the plight of New Orleans until it was too late become rather obvious. Competence just leads to fewer chances to make money. All of the reconstruction contracts can be directed to friends of the Bush Administration, and no one will complain about the extremely generous payments. At the same time, 'undesirable' populations - blacks in New Orleans, gays in San Francisco - can be cleaned up, thus ensuring that the area will vote Republican in the future.

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/ "

So maybe you think that Louis Farrakan is right. He "heard from a reliable source" that a 25 ft. hole was blown in the levee and that it was intentional to spare the white neighborhoods and destroy the black neighborhoods". My big question is, how did President Bush create that hurricane and direct it towards that area? I will bet its those top secret projects coming out of Area 57!

[wvrevy]

So maybe you think that Louis Farrakan is right. He "heard from a reliable source" that a 25 ft. hole was blown in the levee and that it was intentional to spare the white neighborhoods and destroy the black neighborhoods". My big question is, how did President Bush create that hurricane and direct it towards that area? I will bet its those top secret projects coming out of Area 57!
http://www.eclecticala.com/figurals/strawman.jpg
Basic republican tactic #137: When unable to refute an argument, try to compare it to something ludicrous. It's possible the audience will equate the two, without you having to do any actual work.

:rolleyes:

[yeartolate]

You do realize that when taxes are cut, economic growth is generated and more tax revenues flow into the US coffers, don't you? No, I guess you don't.

I think there is a bigger picture. We have spent billions in Iraq over WMD that did not exist.Our subsequent efforts to liberate the Iraqi people will further suck our economy dry because we cannot drop them in the middle of what may be tantamount to a civil war. Iraq in the future will probably further suck our economy dry becasue it is proving to be an excellent breeding ground for terrorists.

What I think we should have paid for was the war. Folks would have insisted on better (non massaged?) intelligence before commiting American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars on a war if they knew the money was coming directly out of their pockets.

I have no problem committing our dollars (as long as the oversight to the spending is better than it has been in Iraq) to rebuild the hurricane ravaged areas. I see how this could eventually generate substantial economic growth.

[Free4Life11]

Good for them. I say we pour as much money into this area as needed. This time of growth may strain the feds, but maybe it will be the shock our economy needs to get jump-started.

If we can give the old folks $500 billion a year, if we can spend hundreds of billions in Iraq, if we can have the largest defence budget in the world (far greater than any other country), then we can damn well spend some money rebuilding the south.

Where will the money come from? No where. The government doesn't care how much they bring in -- they ran a deficit all through the 90's, finally started running a surplus in 1999 & 2000, and now we've been running deficits ever since.

As far as tax cuts....didn't we already have a round of tax cuts during Bush's tenure? Yet from 2000-20003, government revenues have declined. In 2004 they increased, but who knows if that will stay that way if they cut taxes again.

Who's taxes are they thinking about cutting? Are they considering the change to make the charitable deduction available to everyone even if they don't itemize? That's the only tax cut I'd like at this point. I don't know why they never passed it in the first place as it was part of the original plan.

Honestly the tax cuts are so confusing. I know some of the tax changes that were made in Bush's first term, but I don't know how long they will last, etc. It's so difficult to find a nice simple chart that lists the type of cut, how long it will last, and how much it will cost.

[sodaseller]

You do realize that when taxes are cut, economic growth is generated and more tax revenues flow into the US coffers, don't you? No, I guess you don't.
Categorically False - a complete and utter lie

[sodaseller]

I cringe at the fiscal impact, but I see no alternative. We must rebuild the Gulf Coast, and the region wil never be able to finance it itself

[DisDuck]

Dawn.. A little economic lesson. As a Libertarian I am essentially against income taxation of any kind. I think that the Supreme Court in 1898 was correct in ruling that the income tax was unconstitional and that the amendment making it legal should have never been passed. That said, a tax cut only helps if it increases the disposable income of those who has the least disposable income and that that spent money stays here in the US to generate jobs thereby generating more disposable income, etc. etc.

However, the largest by percent of population received the minimalist of tax cuts. That is the Middle Class. The greater percent of income tax cut went to those whose disposable income was already significant. What kind of increase in spending did this group do? Did they buy more yachts, million$ homes, etc. The Middle Class took their new found and minimal increase in disposable income to Wal-Mart or Target. The goods bought there were made overseas. No new US jobs were created because of this increase in spending. Just look at the trade-deficit.. We import more than export which means that few new jobs created here by these tax cuts.

My business was shut-down for 14 months and may be shut-down again next month. My industry lost 100's of thousands of jobs due to off-shore outsourcing. So how did these tax cuts help me or those other's in my industry.

In an analysis of FDR's WPA it was mentioned that an independent oversight committee was set up to ensure that money was spent wisely. This committee did its job so well that little, if any, corruption/mismanagement/misappropriation occurred. With favored-contracts already being awarded. With wage rules relaxed. I cannot trust that this administration will do an honest job on the reconstruction.

Further to answer the question of where this money will come from.. The Government Printing Press. Which brings us to Too Much Money Chasing Too Few Goods, ie. INFLATION.

[Disneyjosh229]

Im not sure if this question has arose in anyother threads, but here is my question...

Why would the American Government and Taxpayers pour hundreds of billions of dollars into a town (n.o) that can easily be devistated again? Im trying to do some logical thinking on this topic, but Im getting dumber every second...

[Free4Life11]

Well, it's no just NO, it's the it's the entire Gulf Coast area. Also New Orleans is a big port that we really need. Why do be build in California when scientists fear "the big one" that may be happening in the coming years? Why build along the Mississippi river?

I think every place has it's dangers, but there are ways they can rebuild the city AND make it safer. Maybe they could raise certain areas with dirt or whatnot, build stronger levees and bigger/better pumps. Build stronger houses, etc.

Also I think a lot of this IS a pep talk....I know a lot of people will probably never return. So this whole "bigger and better" New Oreleans...to me it's just to lift up spirits...maybe just say a "new, safer New Orleans."

[Puffy2]

So maybe you think that Louis Farrakan is right

I don't agree with anything that Louis Farrakan preaches. However, I did notice that he was in Atlanta recently getting support for another million man march on Washington.

And I saw and excellent C-Span session of congress (or the 10 or so congressmen who actually bothered to attend) that addressed poverty, and in that discussion race, in America. Maxine Waters (D - Calif) gave an outstanding, powerful speach on the issue - all from memory and the heart. It's a shame no one heard it (where the he double hockey sticks were all the congressmen???).

Here is the thing, if the Adminstration ignors this issue - race, poverty in American - it's asking for major, serious, domestic problems in this country down the road. It will be a political and national disaster to ignor this problem.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but I clearly see the potential this issue has to get out of hand.

[Tanuki]

But, but, but .........

I thought you didn't help poor people by "giving them money". That's what we always heard from Conservatives before Bush's speech Thursday night.

And why should the Federal Government have to pay to rebuild port facilities that private industry uses? Shouldn't private industry see the same opportunity to profit from shipping that they did in the 1800's? The government didn't originally build those port facilities - investors did and subsequently reaped the profits.

What I saw Thursday night was that when the chips are down Republicans abandon their "values" and become liberals. Now we have a huge spending program to rebuild homes and industries that should be rethinking their location in the path of a future hurricane. There is no law that says another one as strong as Katrina won't come thru there next summer. That's why investors are thinking twice about it.

What a reckless waste of the taxpayers money!

[barbeml]

But, but, but .........

I thought you didn't help poor people by "giving them money". That's what we always heard from Conservatives before Bush's speech Thursday night.

And why should the Federal Government have to pay to rebuild port facilities that private industry uses? Shouldn't private industry see the same opportunity to profit from shipping that they did in the 1800's? The government didn't originally build those port facilities - investors did and subsequently reaped the profits.

What I saw Thursday night was that when the chips are down Republicans abandon their "values" and become liberals. Now we have a huge spending program to rebuild homes and industries that should be rethinking their location in the path of a future hurricane. There is no law that says another one as strong as Katrina won't come thru there next summer. That's why investors are thinking twice about it.

What a reckless waste of the taxpayers money!

You said it.

[Planogirl]

So what do some of you propose? Abandoning New Orleans?

Part of the investment is supposed to be building the levees to be strong enough and tall enough to deal with these storms and also to study restoring the delta to where it used to be. Part of the reason New Orleans took such a hit is that the delta has been severely damaged over the years. The impact would have been not nearly as great if the delta was in the condition it used to be in.

Any coastal area can be damaged by tropical storms. New Orleans has some unique problems but I would personally say that rebuilding New Orleans and protecting it from future problems is much more valuable than a war in another nation. But that's another thread.

[AllyandJack]

There was another tax cut coming? I had no idea. Oh well....

I don't care if they don't make the cut, as long as they don't raise them. If they raise them, DH and I will just increase our 401K percentage and drop our taxable income. I'm not paying anymore taxes. There is no guarantee all the money from a tax increase will go to rebuild the Gulf Coast. There is no guarantee the tax will be repealed when it's rebuilt (Mass Pike Tolls, anyone??).

If I'm going to be missing the money every month, it's going to my 401K, not to the government who can't seem to figure out what to do with it anyway. No problems are getting solved, nothing is getting accomplished and this "project" won't be any different.

[Tanuki]

What damaged the delta was the levee system. So you can't have both.

Before the levee system was put in place in the last century the delta was subject to periodic floods which replenished the soil and kept the land from sinking into the Gulf of Mexico. When the levee system stopped the flooding the process began which removed the natural buffer the wetlands of the delta provided.

I'm not against rebuilding the levee that protects what is left of New Orleans from the river and lake Ponchatrain. The massive Federal anti poverty program and reconstruction spending proposed Thursday night was a whole lot bigger in its scope than just public safety against future flooding.

[Planogirl]

The anti-poverty proposals could be applied to any city. I can see the concern about that.

As for the delta, the proposals involve man-made rebuilding similar to what's being done in the Everglades if I understand it correctly. True that you can't have both the levees and a natural delta but much can be done by Man to rebuild the delta.

[Free4Life11]

Well if taxes aren't going to be raised, then programs are going to have to be cut. And considering that some people in Congress were in plans to make cuts to programs like Medicaid, Food Stamps, Student Loans, it looks like that's where a lot of the cuts will come from.

I am not opposed to a small increase in the federal income tax because I hardly pay any as it is, but I know a lot of people would be, but I'd rather pay a little more and keep programs in tact than have programs cut, potentially programs my family and I benefit from.

How about we cut defense a little bit? We spent $400 billion last year I think and the #2 country in terms of Spending (Russia) isn't even close to that. We can't be the only country with a good national defense program.

[Puffy2]

They can start by repealing the tax breaks the republicans have given to the major oil companies (whose profits increased by 30% in the last quarter and continue to rise...despite the so called "shortage").

[mickeyfan2]

Well if taxes aren't going to be raised, then programs are going to have to be cut. And considering that some people in Congress were in plans to make cuts to programs like Medicaid, Food Stamps, Student Loans, it looks like that's where a lot of the cuts will come from.

I am not opposed to a small increase in the federal income tax because I hardly pay any as it is, but I know a lot of people would be, but I'd rather pay a little more and keep programs in tact than have programs cut, potentially programs my family and I benefit from.

How about we cut defense a little bit? We spent $400 billion last year I think and the #2 country in terms of Spending (Russia) isn't even close to that. We can't be the only country with a good national defense program.

I would only accept a tax increase if every federal budget is cut by the same % as the increase. All need to pay not just the tax payers.

[Free4Life11]

Well you can't choose to accept or not accept a tax increase. It if goes up, it goes up. Nothing you can do except write your senators. I doubt they'd ever do an across the board cut.

I really have no problem paying taxes or slightly higher taxes. I think the benefits are worth it.

[Disneyjosh229]

So what do some of you propose? Abandoning New Orleans?

Part of the investment is supposed to be building the levees to be strong enough and tall enough to deal with these storms and also to study restoring the delta to where it used to be. Part of the reason New Orleans took such a hit is that the delta has been severely damaged over the years. The impact would have been not nearly as great if the delta was in the condition it used to be in.

Any coastal area can be damaged by tropical storms. New Orleans has some unique problems but I would personally say that rebuilding New Orleans and protecting it from future problems is much more valuable than a war in another nation. But that's another thread.

"Unique Problems" would be an understatement. Take a look at the whole picture guys....youre pouring hundreds of billions into a city THATS UNDERWATER!!! Screw the levee's and deltas, why would you posibly want to go back to a place thats underwater and surrounded by it?

[Free4Life11]

Again, do you not realize that cities and communites ALL ACROSS the Gulf Coast were devastated? We're pouring money into the AREA, not just New Orleans.

I've never heard anyone say that we are pouring hundreds of billions into NEW ORLEANS. I have heard that we are pouring a lot of money into the Gulf Coast.

[Disneyjosh229]

Again, do you not realize that cities and communites ALL ACROSS the Gulf Coast were devastated? We're pouring money into the AREA, not just New Orleans.

I've never heard anyone say that we are pouring hundreds of billions into NEW ORLEANS. I have heard that we are pouring a lot of money into the Gulf Coast.

Yes, but a good 1/2 of that money is going to N.O

[Disneyjosh229]

(whose profits increased by 30% in the last quarter and continue to rise...despite the so called "shortage").

Supply and Demand.... (The principle of economics)

Less oil=More profit

[Puffy2]

Supply and Demand.... (The principle of economics)

Less oil=More profit


No. Less Oil To Sell = Having to Raise Prices To Break Even

Huge Profits means they are ripping you off and most of us are too dumb to realize it.

[halestrm]

Gotta admit, I am conservative, and I have no idea where Bush is coming from on this one. This is not the Federal Gov't job. Help city and states function and protect, yes! Rebuild better than before, NO!

I cannot believe the bulls@$# I am hearing. I have lost homes in 2 tornados and family lost a home in a forest fire. INSURANCE paid for our loss. I would love an opportunity at government land. I have been saving 4 years to buy property outside of the burning heat of Phoenix, AZ summers. Today, finally it is cooling, we only hit 102. My AC bill runs up to $500 in the summer. Where is my gov't subsidy to pay the bill? Really, I don't want to turn it up to 83, that is too hot, please, help me out BUSH.

I miss Reagan. I want a true conservative. I believe we needed to take out Iraq. I am angry we aren't still bombing and doing the job. Quit ***** footing around. This speach was more "kiss the dem's tush". Quit worring about being non-partisan, they don't care and never will.

[Free4Life11]

Yes, but a good 1/2 of that money is going to N.O

Oh really? News to me.

So far they've only approved some $60 billion or so that I have heard of. I don't know what it's been earmarked for but I'm sure you'd like to enlighten us.

[Planogirl]

"Unique Problems" would be an understatement. Take a look at the whole picture guys....youre pouring hundreds of billions into a city THATS UNDERWATER!!! Screw the levee's and deltas, why would you posibly want to go back to a place thats underwater and surrounded by it?
New Orleans is 50% flooded right now so it's not totally underwater. The older parts of the city never did flood in fact so I would hope that these can be spared from abandonment.

As for the levees, they failed due to neglect and not modernizing and strengthening them. The federal government is responsible for a major portion of that and continually cut back funding over several years time. If they are at least partially responsible for infrastructure, I would assume that includes the levees.

Finally, New Orleans is a vital port for the midsection of the country. You would have to find another port that can serve the Mississippi River and surrounding areas as well as New Orleans did. And then build it which is also not exactly an inexpensive task.

[Saffron]

... I miss Reagan. I want a true conservative. I believe we needed to take out Iraq. I am angry we aren't still bombing and doing the job. Quit ***** footing around. This speach was more "kiss the dem's tush". Quit worring about being non-partisan, they don't care and never will.

Oh yeah. Killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children will solve all the world's problems, including finding the money to rebuild the United States of America's Gulf Coast cities that were destroyed in a natural disaster and your AC bill.

[Free4Life11]

I want a true conservative. I believe we needed to take out Iraq. I am angry we aren't still bombing and doing the job.

Well if that's what true conservatives think I'm glad I don't consider myself a conservative anymore. What exactly did we gain from going in Iraq?

We were given false evidence to gain support for this war and I and many others fell for it. Years later the majority of Americans realize that it wasn't worth it, that he haven't gained anything, and that we really aren't any more "secure" than we were. We've had such a focus on the "international war on terror" that we have neglected priorities in our own country.