1. I'm sorry, but I can't agree. I'm sure it would be different if I lived there, but that's why we have governments, right? To make the hard decisions that are best for the majority?

Between the costs of the emergency services efforts, the cleanup, and the potential rebuilding, I would imagine NOLA has more than consumed any "tax surplus" they may have sent the US over the years.

The ports and the oil are important, I >DO< agree with that, but that doesn't mean we need to sustain a residential area for people who want to bask in the historic culture of the South.

Build some highspeed rail and other means of transport for the dock works, etc., and let the Gulf of Mexico have is coastline back.

Posted at 10:54PM on Sep 3rd 2007 by A Nauthuner

2. Ok, who's going to pay for the rail system? Also, where in the North are you from? It's only fair to share.

Posted at 10:57PM on Sep 3rd 2007 by Kelly Leahy

3. As long as we're going to eliminate New Orleans, let's get rid of jazz too. That's not as New York as people think it is- and I live there.

As a musician, a world without New Orleans is very quiet.

Posted at 1:09PM on Sep 4th 2007 by Eric

4. A Nauthuner wants to keep the oil and the port, but let the rest of New Orleans sink. Awesome. I'm so friggin' proud to be an American right now.

Posted at 2:06PM on Sep 4th 2007 by Julie

5. I think your first point is your best. New Orleanians pay taxes, and certainly other locations have suffered repeated natural disasters (particularly in California and Florida) and they always receive mounds of federal dollars. It might be that a line should be drawn (and I think one should be drawn), but nobody's talking about revamping disaster assistance; they're talking about making an exception for New Orleans.

However, the other points are weak. New Orleans has essentially abandoned the port. While other cities have invested heavily in their ports to increase their tonnage, New Orleans has clearly shown it doesn't care about expanding the port. Sure, you say that "if you combine our port with the nearby port of LaPlace, was have the largest port system in the world ton for ton." However, what you don't mention is that the Port of New Orleans only has 42% the gross tonnage of LaPlace, for goodness sake. Compared to the, say, the Port of Houston, that's pitiful.

Moreover, ports don't actually employ that many people. New Orleans could stay very small and still suffice to service a large port. We need other industry.

Your third point also has problems. New Orleans is largely delapidated. The Quarter is sufficiently touristy, and the Garden District is quite pretty, but much of the city is falling apart and not particuarly attractive. Deride your run-of-the-mill suburbs if you will, but they're at least well-kept. New Orleans city officials need to realize that we need more tree planting, more repaved streets, and less blight if we're going to have a city that's pretty for ordinary citizens.

Again, I agree that New Orleans has value and deserves to be rebuilt, but it does no good to overstate the case.

Posted at 11:26PM on Sep 4th 2007 by Owen Courrèges

6. Way up North, like Midwest North.

Comparing NOLA to other areas which are equally hazardous to live in will not get us anywhere.

As mentioned above, the Qtr is a ruin, many of the buildings are barely standing and in some cases are not fully occupied, standing for touristas only with decripit / empty upper floors.

NOLA Jazz is not the only Jazz, and it wouldn't end just because it had to move. And if tis that important, raise it and harden it against storms, etc., but lose the residential areas that are below sea level.

What's even more frustrating is the stories which features people complaining that speculators buying up the devestated areas because then the "residents" can't come back.

What's that? Its one thing to live a storied life, grow up somewhere "interesting" and have no way to leave, support systems, family, familiarity, I get it.

All of the above are gone. Strike now, make a change and move on.

Turn the lower 9th and other similar areas back into wetlands - heck make them parks, just don't put people in harm's way for nostalgic purposes.

Posted at 8:52AM on Sep 5th 2007 by A Nauthuner

7. NOLA Jazz is the original Jazz. It all comes from and through New Orleans.

All I know is the idiot mouth breathers I see dragging their fat rear ends to Wal Mart to spend their welfare checks..those people need to go. End Federal or state assistance to them immediately, because it's sufficiently expensive enough to live here as it is, and no one, I repeat NO one should get a free ride or even a heavily subsidized one. Too many people working too hard to keep their heads above water to allow this to continue to happen.

Get rid of the mouth breathers, the thugs and the leeches, and the educated white and black people will FLOOD back into the city.

Posted at 9:45AM on Sep 5th 2007 by Nicole

8. I'm not against a smaller footprint. I think that it would strengthen the city. However, this is unpopular politically so it seems like urban planners are using other nefarious means of shutting people out, i.e. bulldozing their homes. All I'm saying is that I want our fair share of the pie and I want the best people we can get to rebuild our infrastructure.

About NOLA jazz, you can't move a culture and expect it to remain intact. So yes, the music would suffer but there are certainly bigger issues to deal with.

Posted at 2:09PM on Sep 5th 2007 by Kelly Leahy