The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else • Hacker News Board

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#61

Post by maxerickson » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:28 PM UTC

ars wrote: post #54

It's really disturbing reading comments cheering the destruction because the victims are rich, or because they work for energy companies. If hate is a necessary part of believing in climate change I'm not surprised people want nothing to do with that.

I wonder, is your comment intentional or is it just a failure of critical reasoning?

It's become a common tactic in public discourse to pretend as if issues are cleanly split between two coherent sides, with all action and words associated with the issue fully ascribable to one side or the other. But of course this is ridiculous, yahoos should get full credit for their yahoo ideas without it being necessary for anyone with even a vaguely similar position to denounce them.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#62

Post by ynniv » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:29 PM UTC

ocschwar wrote: post #35

The only real problem is that this was a decision made ad hoc. People whose neighborhoods are likely to be flooded by such a decision should know years in advance that they are designated for it.

Flood zones are meticulously mapped, and owning a property in them usually requires Federally mandated flood insurance. [ http://www.harriscountyfemt.org/ ]

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#63

Post by maxerickson » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:31 PM UTC

danschumann wrote: post #26

rootlocus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're talking houses vs houses, not people vs people, but how is the morality different? If we'd be talking paperclips vs paperclips would that be morally similar? Or is the monetary value of houses somehow large enough to justify a similarity to human lives?

Lets say you lose 10000 dollars worth of paper clips. Big deal, buy more. But if you lose 10000 dollars worth of photos, computers, files, etc, it is a big deal because they are harder to replace.

If they are harder to replace it is likely they are worth more than $10,000.

Maybe only to the people involved, but it's likely that a fairly accurate dollar value could still be assigned to the loss.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#64

Post by ApolloFortyNine » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:42 PM UTC

todayiamme wrote: post #58

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Harvey was the first cat3+ hurricane to hit the US in 12 years. Your comment is already grey, I just wanted you to know why. EDIT: Could I not get downvoted for stating a fact. That'd be great. I guess it was actually only 11 years and 10 months, is that the problem here?

And that's pretty pointless, because it is clear that while there is seasonable variation in the frequency of occurrence of storms; the shift in the frequency of intensity is a phenomena that's a global event happening at scale. The global weather system goes through a series of cold and warm cycles, but the mean has been shifting for a while that has had a global shift in the frequencies of different storm strengths…

At the beginning of your post, you mention the 12 year gap as a result of seasonal variation between cold and warm cycles. Then your source points out that the current warm phase has been going on since 1995.

This is a waste of time.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#65

Post by yardie » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:44 PM UTC

murtnowski wrote: post #16

yardie wrote: post #9

I find this article beautifully ironic. Climate change denying executives have homes and offices flooded by climate changed storm water.

Why? Houston was been flooded several times before. Particularly in 1929 and 1935 when the county finally decided to form a flood control agency. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_County_Flood_Control_... Climate change is real, but if every time we get bad weather you call it that it’s a little like crying wolf.

Before flood mitigation was installed Houston rarely flooded. After flood mitigation was installed Houston flooded even less. Now Houston, even with flood mitigation, is flooding. So what has changed?

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#66

Post by maxerickson » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:45 PM UTC

ynniv wrote: post #62

ocschwar wrote: post #35

The only real problem is that this was a decision made ad hoc. People whose neighborhoods are likely to be flooded by such a decision should know years in advance that they are designated for it.

Flood zones are meticulously mapped, and owning a property in them usually requires Federally mandated flood insurance. [ http://www.harriscountyfemt.org/ ]

Meticulous may not be the best word choice.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/09/0...

The gist of it is that people don't want their properties classified as being in a flood zone (flood insurance in a high risk area is necessarily expensive) and this does influence the maps.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#67

Post by zeveb » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:47 PM UTC

It seems to me that flooding the neighbourhood to save the city was a perfectly justifiable decision, but it also seems perfectly reasonable to compensate those whose homes were thereby destroyed.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#68

Post by balthasar » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:48 PM UTC

jsonne wrote: post #45

balthasar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely had a smile on my face this entire article.

That's really unfortunate. You likely know none of these people, have no idea what kind of lives they live or beliefs they hold, and yet smile at their misfortune? Even if they didn't believe in climate change or disagreed with you generally politically so what? They deserve to suffer and be punished? It really irks me that in the age of the internet where we have an unprecedented ability to come together as people m…

People who actively contribute to global warming deserve their fate. I'm not sure why you would defend people like that.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#69

Post by mbillie1 » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:49 PM UTC

zeveb wrote: post #67

It seems to me that flooding the neighbourhood to save the city was a perfectly justifiable decision, but it also seems perfectly reasonable to compensate those whose homes were thereby destroyed.

I agree, it seems exactly that simple.

Re: The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

#70

Post by yardie » Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:51 PM UTC

jsonne wrote: post #45

balthasar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely had a smile on my face this entire article.

That's really unfortunate. You likely know none of these people, have no idea what kind of lives they live or beliefs they hold, and yet smile at their misfortune? Even if they didn't believe in climate change or disagreed with you generally politically so what? They deserve to suffer and be punished? It really irks me that in the age of the internet where we have an unprecedented ability to come together as people m…

I don’t know these people personally but I do know people that work in energy. They believe climate change is real. Their companies are actively researching and planning for it. Their bosses believe climate change is real as well. But their bosses pay think tanks and politicians to deny climate change is even happening.

Why is that?