Ports yes. City, no. I also think it is nuts to have a city where San Francisco is and I live in the Bay Area. It should be warehouses and docks. That wouldn't be pretty but so aren't skyscrapers swaying in a 7.0 earthquake.
authfriend wrote: >Y'all really should read the article Cliff posted >here a day or two ago explaining why we must have >a city where New Orleans is. Not rebuilding it >isn't an option. > >--- In [email protected], Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Because much of that land is probably owned by Republican property >>owners who will lose their shirts and whine like babies if they are >>told they can't rebuild there. >> >>shempmcgurk wrote: >> >> >> >>>Why? >>>by Robert Anderson >>> >>> ><snip> > > >>>One tends to have a different perspective toward feelings of >>>compassion and guilt when the cost of building a below-sea-level >>>city next to a hurricane-prone ocean is coming out of the pockets >>>of people who have chosen to live out their lives on high ground >>>out of the path of an angry sea. >>> >>>So, why do it? >>> >>> > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
