Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 128 posts

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

#101

Post by libertyEQ »

jccc wrote: post #93
kyleblarson wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My grandfather in Kentucky pronounced Missouri 'Mizurah'.

I lived in the middle of Missouri from 1994 through 2014 and never once heard a voice say Missour-ah that wasn't coming from a candidate for office on TV. (To be fair, there might have been some people in rural parts of the state who did talk like that. But usually it's coming from people who probably shouldn't.)

That's how The Outlaw Josie Wales pronounces it when he gives the red-legs chasing him, "a Missurah boat ride."

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

#102

Post by athenot »

dcole2929 wrote: post #82

I'm sorry these people lost their homes, but it does seem pretty straightforward that if you build in a flood plane your home might flood. If there is any failure here it's that they weren't given adequate warning before they flooded the neighborhoods. It sounds like they announced it for the next morning but because of the pace of the water rising they had to blow it over night instead. That's something you start an…

Houston is proud of their low regulation and unrestrictive zoning. Requiring flooding insurance would be at odds with their philosophy.

However you can't have your cake and eat it too. Other regions have come up with regulations specifically because of the belief that a majority of the population benefits from them. The downside of regulation is cost and inconvenience—and a potential for corruption.

If a region decides against regulation then so be it. But then it incombs to its residents to plan their own contingencies (whether in the form of savings or insurance). The article's title is definitely on the click-bait side of the spectrum to cater to a narrative that the rich are overly bearing the burden of everyone else.

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

#103

Post by amaranth »

Filligree wrote: post #76
mbillie1 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, it seems exactly that simple.

That's what flood insurance is for. In a socialist democracy you'd be right, but in case of the USA, it seems more appropriate to require that homeowners get insurance.

Flood insurance is a government run program that is pretty "socialist" in the sense you seem to be implying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Flood_Insurance_Progr...

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

#104

Post by ensignavenger »

polartx wrote: post #97
dcole2929 wrote: post #82

I'm sorry these people lost their homes, but it does seem pretty straightforward that if you build in a flood plane your home might flood. If there is any failure here it's that they weren't given adequate warning before they flooded the neighborhoods. It sounds like they announced it for the next morning but because of the pace of the water rising they had to blow it over night instead. That's something you start an…

I agree, for the folks that built in a 'flood pool' plain, even if they feel that wasn't adequately communicated to them when they purchased. The folks outside of that pool, however, whose homes were only flooded because the Corp of Engineers decided to open the reservoir floodgates, have a reasonable claim for damages. Their attorney is basing this claim on a violation of the 5th amendment, specifically relating to…

If the homes were flooded because the flood gates were opened, were they no by definition, in a flood plain?

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

#105

Post by libertyEQ »

mikeash wrote: post #96
briandear wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crazy. All those oil companies forcing you to buy stuff that gets transported by trucks that use oil. You’re blaming the drug dealers for people choosing to shoot heroin. Feel free to stop consuming oil. Even your Tesla has plastics made from oil and uses power generated using oil. If you buy a single thing made in China, you are buying products generally made using coal-fired electricity. Unless you live in a grass…

It's more like: you're blaming the drug dealers for telling people drugs are healthy and suppressing research that says they do any harm.

To be fair, there doesn't seem to be many people willing to significantly change their lifestyle to drastically minimize their carbon footprint.

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

#106

Post by libertyEQ »

vardump wrote: post #42
briandear wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crazy. All those oil companies forcing you to buy stuff that gets transported by trucks that use oil. You’re blaming the drug dealers for people choosing to shoot heroin. Feel free to stop consuming oil. Even your Tesla has plastics made from oil and uses power generated using oil. If you buy a single thing made in China, you are buying products generally made using coal-fired electricity. Unless you live in a grass…

The rest of the argument seemed kinda valid, but one nitpick: > Even your Tesla has plastics made from oil I think nearly all plastics are made out of natural gas, not oil.

To elaborate further:

"Chemical plants produce olefins by steam cracking of natural gas liquids like ethane and propane. Olefins are the basis for polymers and oligomers used in plastics, resins, fibers, elastomers, lubricants, and gels."

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

#107

Post by giardini »

todayiamme wrote: post #31
murtnowski wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Except the argument isn't about the frequency of storms nor the occurrence of a severe storm, but the increase in frequency of severe storms. Essentially, if we put more energy into the system, then we shouldn't be surprised if more energy is outputted as a result of the same system. > A sustained upward trend is found between the global proportion of Cat 4–5 hurricanes and ACCI (Fig. 4), balanced by a similar decrea…

Factors other than climate change dominate in Houston:

a) Houston was built on a mosquito- and disease-ridden swamp that settlers drained:

http://news.tfionline.com/post/164819904697/the-trouble-with...

b) Parts of Houston are sinking due to subsidence: water is being removed and the land above sinks. 3-10 feet doesn't seem to be a lot until the wave hits your front door:

http://blogs.nbc12.com/weather/2017/08/houstons-flooding-its...

c) Private developers have very short-term goals: they buy cheap lowland, build homes on it, and sell them in good weather at high prices. Once they're sold out, the developers' obligations cease and the problem passes to local authorities and FEMA.

FEMA should not sell insurance for areas likely to flood. [well, they don't, but they need to extend the no-sell areas even further] The cities, counties and state have power to ban development in low-lying regions but are susceptible to fraud and bribery. Developers are very wealthy men who are politically connected. Homebuyers are like sheep: naive and herd-like. They aren't very wise politically.

I know someone in Houston whose house has been flooded seven times. Last year he bought no flood insurance. He's out of a house but expects some governmental entity to buy him out. For him its a way of life; for me, a flood is "nature's way of telling you something's wrong":

"Nature's Way" - Spirit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V0Vu_utUZY

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

#108

Post by libertyEQ »

amaranth wrote: post #94
yardie wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

A lot of what has changed is more development happening. Pavement doesn't absorb water all that well. When the flood mitigation talked about in this article was put in place the area they chose to flood to handle overflow was undeveloped and so was all of the surrounding area.

Check this out:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervious_concrete

"Pervious concrete was first used in the 1800s in Europe as pavement surfacing and load bearing walls.[3] Cost efficiency was the main motive due to a decreased amount of cement.[3] It became popular again in the 1920s for two storey homes in Scotland and England. It became increasingly viable in Europe after WWII due to the scarcity of cement. It did not become as popular in the US until the 1970s"

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

#109

Post by ryan606 »

dcole2929 wrote: post #82

I'm sorry these people lost their homes, but it does seem pretty straightforward that if you build in a flood plane your home might flood. If there is any failure here it's that they weren't given adequate warning before they flooded the neighborhoods. It sounds like they announced it for the next morning but because of the pace of the water rising they had to blow it over night instead. That's something you start an…

"The other issue I see is that for some reason Houston didn't require all of these people to have flood insurance."

Banks require homeowners in flood plains with mortgages to maintain flood insurance. The problem is if you don't have a mortgage, you don't necessarily need insurance. However, perpetual Federal Government bailouts of homeowners creates moral hazard, and the expectation that Government will make you whole regardless of insurance, and thus bigger risks for all.

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

#110

Post by libertyEQ »

briandear wrote: post #27
yardie wrote: post #9

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

Was this flood caused by climate change? There were massive floods in Houston long before there was even a city: the town was built on a swamp. The difference now is that there is more concrete and also more places to flood. 200 years ago, where massive floods caused by climate change? Possibly. But was human-created CO2 to blame? Not at all. Attributing everything to climate change is getting silly. It’s not differe…

>It’s no coincidence that climate change people are almost universally leftists — redistributing the means of production is their obsession; climate change hysteria is just a means to achieve that end.

I used to think this was some Limbaugh conspiracy theory and then I read Naomi Klein’s book, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Changes_Everything

Post reply on HN