Help the Victims Rebuild... Inland

By -
The victims of Sandy should be helped to rebuild their homes.

But for many of them, their should be a string attached: move inland. These storms have been getting worse, and the odds seems to be high they will keep doing so. I don't think it was ever sensible to subsidize beach construction, economically or environmentally. However, it is getting less sensible every year.

See the Wall Street Journal on the topic here.

Comments

  1. Scott3:42 PM

    That's what happened here in Houston after Ike. But I'm sure in 10 years without a hurricane, everybody will forget and demand things relax, and they will start building up the beaches again.

    Don't agree with you about the whole climate change thing, but whatever the case, it really is stupid to build expensive things on beaches, especially when you do it on the cheap and don't protect it. Galveston proper has a large seawall, which is advisable. The properly built structures here have survived over a century of this stuff.

    I'll take a properly-designed and well-built structure over insurance any day.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more