On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
* prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development
in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and
tearing down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile
homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit
again and again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes,
and everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that
want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the
price for their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying
waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the
states won't provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't
finance homes without flood insurance, well, that eventually will
solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you. Not sure I'd go
as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those areas
but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or federal aid
available to rebuild following a hurricane. Next comes the question of
the use of state or federal rescue resources should a resident find
him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate. Is the
progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?

On 9/13/17 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
* prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior
to being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine
for Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development
in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and
tearing down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile
homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit
again and again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes,
and everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called
Chesapeake Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and
a growing amount of new construction. Nice place, except when
Chesapeake Bay overflows and floods homes and businesses for four
blocks up from the high water line. That area is a foot or two above
sea level. Maybe. Why construction in these places is allowed is
beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that
want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the
price for their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying
waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if
the states won't provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't
finance homes without flood insurance, well, that eventually will
solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida
to Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few
storms with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have
survived. I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a
few that make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states
should be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood
insurance. Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of
arrogance and stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you.* Not sure I'd go
as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those areas
but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or federal aid
available to rebuild following a hurricane.* Next comes the question of
the use of state or federal rescue resources should a resident find
him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate.* Is the
progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?


Death panels seem to be a child of the GOP majority in Congress.

No, I think rescues should be attempted when possible. But I don't think
first responders should be sent out and risk their lives in the height
of a dangerous storm to save those too stupid to save themselves after
clear and repeated warnings were given.

Your constant slams on "progressive-liberal" are as funny as your
support of Trump, and are just as foolish. Just about every bit of
social progress this country has made is the result of actions by
progressive liberals who were fought every step of the way by you
conservative regressives.

On 9/13/2017 9:30 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
* prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior
to being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion
fine for Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop
development in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of
condemning and tearing down susceptible structures in those areas,
outlawing mobile homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is
going to get hit again and again and again by these large summer
and fall hurricanes, and everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called
Chesapeake Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages
and a growing amount of new construction. Nice place, except when
Chesapeake Bay overflows and floods homes and businesses for four
blocks up from the high water line. That area is a foot or two
above sea level. Maybe. Why construction in these places is allowed
is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped
and replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states
that want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay
the price for their folly of never-ending construction along
low-lying waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land.
Alternately, if the states won't provide flood insurance and
mortage companies won't finance homes without flood insurance,
well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida
to Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up
here would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees
that if uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a
few storms with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees
have survived. I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still
have a few that make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states
should be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood
insurance. Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of
arrogance and stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you.* Not sure I'd go
as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those
areas but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or
federal aid available to rebuild following a hurricane.* Next comes
the question of the use of state or federal rescue resources should a
resident find him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate.* Is
the progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?


Death panels seem to be a child of the GOP majority in Congress.

No, I think rescues should be attempted when possible. But I don't think
first responders should be sent out and risk their lives in the height
of a dangerous storm to save those too stupid to save themselves after
clear and repeated warnings were given.

Your constant slams on "progressive-liberal" are as funny as your
support of Trump, and are just as foolish. Just about every bit of
social progress this country has made is the result of actions by
progressive liberals who were fought every step of the way by you
conservative regressives.


Read up on where and how the "progressive" movement originated.
Hasn't changed much since it's inception.

On 9/13/17 9:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 9:30 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
* prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior
to being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion
fine for Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop
development in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of
condemning and tearing down susceptible structures in those areas,
outlawing mobile homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is
going to get hit again and again and again by these large summer
and fall hurricanes, and everyone is going to pace the price for
them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called
Chesapeake Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages
and a growing amount of new construction. Nice place, except when
Chesapeake Bay overflows and floods homes and businesses for four
blocks up from the high water line. That area is a foot or two
above sea level. Maybe. Why construction in these places is
allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped
and replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states
that want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay
the price for their folly of never-ending construction along
low-lying waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land.
Alternately, if the states won't provide flood insurance and
mortage companies won't finance homes without flood insurance,
well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida
to Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up
here would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees
that if uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a
few storms with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees
have survived. I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still
have a few that make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states
should be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood
insurance. Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height
of arrogance and stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you.* Not sure I'd
go as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those
areas but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or
federal aid available to rebuild following a hurricane.* Next comes
the question of the use of state or federal rescue resources should a
resident find him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate.* Is
the progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?


Death panels seem to be a child of the GOP majority in Congress.

No, I think rescues should be attempted when possible. But I don't
think first responders should be sent out and risk their lives in the
height of a dangerous storm to save those too stupid to save
themselves after clear and repeated warnings were given.

Your constant slams on "progressive-liberal" are as funny as your
support of Trump, and are just as foolish. Just about every bit of
social progress this country has made is the result of actions by
progressive liberals who were fought every step of the way by you
conservative regressives.


Read up on where and how the "progressive" movement originated.
Hasn't changed much since it's inception.



Yes, Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson were progressives.

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about Florida,
he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development in
low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and tearing
down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile homes,
and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit again and
again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes, and
everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that want
it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the price for
their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying waterfronts,
typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the states won't
provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't finance homes
without flood insurance, well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do some
serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.


Since you no longer own waterfront property, no one should. Eh?
You' ll never change.
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"Mr. Luddite" Wrote in message:
On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development
in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and
tearing down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile
homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit
again and again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes,
and everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that
want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the
price for their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying
waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the
states won't provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't
finance homes without flood insurance, well, that eventually will
solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you. Not sure I'd go
as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those areas
but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or federal aid
available to rebuild following a hurricane. Next comes the question of
the use of state or federal rescue resources should a resident find
him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate. Is the
progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?



Spoke to a fellow who lives on Sattelite Beach with his son. He
said they don't carry flood insurance because it's too expensive.
Aparently he isn't poor enough to get it for free, or well
subsidized.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 9/13/17 11:37 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about Florida,
he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development in
low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and tearing
down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile homes,
and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit again and
again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes, and
everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that want
it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the price for
their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying waterfronts,
typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the states won't
provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't finance homes
without flood insurance, well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do some
serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.


Since you no longer own waterfront property, no one should. Eh?
You' ll never change.
x


Your assumption about waterfront property is, of course, wrong. But the
homesite is so high above the water level, we'd all be in arks before it
flooded.

On 9/13/17 11:43 AM, justan wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" Wrote in message:
On 9/13/2017 8:53 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about
Florida, he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development
in low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and
tearing down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile
homes, and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit
again and again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes,
and everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that
want it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the
price for their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying
waterfronts, typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the
states won't provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't
finance homes without flood insurance, well, that eventually will
solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do
some serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.

Well, this is a rare occasion where I agree with you. Not sure I'd go
as far as prohibiting development of privately held land in those areas
but it should be solely at the owner's risk with no state or federal aid
available to rebuild following a hurricane. Next comes the question of
the use of state or federal rescue resources should a resident find
him/herself trapped after being warned to evacuate. Is the
progressive-liberal mentality ready to just let them die?



Spoke to a fellow who lives on Sattelite Beach with his son. He
said they don't carry flood insurance because it's too expensive.
Aparently he isn't poor enough to get it for free, or well
subsidized.


Subsidized flood insurance should be eliminated. Let the property owners
bear the burden of living at a low-lying beach or in a flood plain.

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 11:37 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about Florida,
he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development in
low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and tearing
down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile homes,
and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit again and
again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes, and
everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that want
it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the price for
their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying waterfronts,
typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the states won't
provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't finance homes
without flood insurance, well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do some
serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.


Since you no longer own waterfront property, no one should. Eh?
You' ll never change.
x


Your assumption about waterfront property is, of course, wrong. But the
homesite is so high above the water level, we'd all be in arks before it
flooded.


You never owned waterfront property?
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 11:37 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 9/13/17 8:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/13/2017 8:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/13/17 7:58 AM, justan wrote:


Governor Rick Scott has been getting high marks for his efforts to
prepare Florida for the disaster.


Does that make up for the huge criminal enterprise Scott ran prior to
being governor? You know, the one that earned a $1.7 billion fine for
Medicare fraud?

Florida is not prepared. If Scott really were concerned about Florida,
he'd be spearheading a statewide effort to stop development in
low-lying coastal areas, and begin a process of condemning and tearing
down susceptible structures in those areas, outlawing mobile homes,
and slowing growth generally. Florida is going to get hit again and
again and again by these large summer and fall hurricanes, and
everyone is going to pace the price for them.

We have a low-lying area a few miles north of here, called Chesapeake
Beach, a quaint little nameplace full of old cottages and a growing
amount of new construction. Nice place, except when Chesapeake Bay
overflows and floods homes and businesses for four blocks up from the
high water line. That area is a foot or two above sea level. Maybe.
Why construction in these places is allowed is beyond my comprehension.

I think the national flood insurance program ought to be dropped and
replaced by a state-by-state funded program for those states that want
it. Let Floridians, Texas, Louisianians, et cetera, pay the price for
their folly of never-ending construction along low-lying waterfronts,
typically built on "reclaimed" land. Alternately, if the states won't
provide flood insurance and mortage companies won't finance homes
without flood insurance, well, that eventually will solve the problem.

Oh, we're close to the Bay, but...we're about 115' above sea level
here. If the Bay floods us, it is the end of the world.


You won't flood but a direct hit of a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane would do some
serious damage to your famous red barn.



Flooding of low-lying seashore areas during a hurricane from Florida to
Texas is pretty much inevitable. Cat 4 or 5 hurricane winds up here
would be a rarity, but a possibility. We have some large trees that if
uprooted could certainly smash through the roof. We've had a few storms
with high winds...70-90 mph...but so far our big trees have survived.
I've had a few cut down over the years, but we still have a few that
make me nervous.

The point is, federal flood insurance should NOT be available to
property owners in shore areas that keep getting hit. The states should
be restricting growth in those areas and funding state flood insurance.
Building a home in the Keys, for example, is the height of arrogance and
stupidity.


Since you no longer own waterfront property, no one should. Eh?
You' ll never change.
x


Your assumption about waterfront property is, of course, wrong. But the
homesite is so high above the water level, we'd all be in arks before it
flooded.


You never owned waterfront property?


If only you had a brain...

--
Posted with my iPhone 7+.