Is the government going to expect those of us who did not elect to build a house on hurricane-prone property to keep paying money to these people "affected" by Rita/Katrina?<br><br>We're talking billions and billions and billions here, especially if Baby Fat Landrieu gets her way. <br><br>
There's a difference between rebuilding vacation homes for the wealthy, and communities where the average schmuck lives and works, in vulnerable areas. would also help if the Fed stepped in and made it a little harder for insurance companies to just up and bail on entire regions. I mean, why be in the insurance business if you're not gonna offer insurance? <br><br>
Yeah, Bryan used to worry a lot about The Entitlement Mentality™ too, specially when it comes to the Federal Government helping the poor. I wonder if Jamal has similar concerns for Jeb Bush year after year, because as you might have guessed, Rush doesn't.<br><br><br><br><br>
The simple answer is another question: How much of our economy relies on sea ports such as that on the Mississippi Delta?<br><br>Most often, that is the motivation for building cities like New Orleans. We need a significant port city on the Gulf of Mexico and that city needs people to populate it and work in it. The more important question is: why did we decide not to spend the menial amount of money to fix the Gulf Coast?<br><br>-- Charlie Alpha Roger Yankee Whiskey
On today's Meet the Press, columnist Tom Friedman had some interesting comments regarding the Katrina/Rita reconstruction spending:<br><br><br>"...What we're really debating about Katrina in this bidding of--"I'll give you $50 billion. No, I'll give you $60 billion"--and we should call it by its real name. We are debating how much money we are going to borrow from China--OK?--because we're running a deficit, OK? And we're clearly not going to cut spending to make up that money. So the real debate--we should call this by its real name. It's the, "How much money are we going to borrow from China act to rebuild New Orleans?"<br><br><br>"...Well, I think that if you look at the amount of money that we have cut taxes and the incredible contribution it has made to the deficit, you would think we would have gotten a little more buzz in this economy, Tim, than what, 3 1/2, you know, percent growth, 3 percent growth. We have gone into debt, OK, at a massive level, and the result of that has not been a great improvement in our infrastructure, in our engineering, in the number of young people empowered and able to compete in the world tomorrow. So I just don't buy that. I think we have--we are now in a position where China has-- they're heading for $1 trillion, OK, of our--in reserves that they're going to be holding, basically. And the leverage that is going to give China over the United States in the coming years, God knows where-- how that's going to play out..."<br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.