| ▲ | comrade1234 2 days ago |
| I would be surprised if the USA is even able to plan far enough ahead to put in a sea barrier/gates in time to protect New York City, similar to London. New Orleans? At least the old town is elevated. |
|
| ▲ | BowBun 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Be surprised, I guess - https://www.nyc.gov/site/lmcr/progress/battery-coastal-resil... This project in NYC has been going on for a bit. The difference is LA has a GDP of about $340B+, while NY has a GDP of $2.3T+. |
| |
| ▲ | kevin_thibedeau 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The Whitney museum has a whole system for putting up flood walls around the perimeter, plus the ground floor is just the gift shop. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | munificent 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| New York City will be fine. New Orleans is fucked. For local stuff like this, the US isn't a country, it's 50 countries in a trenchcoat, and Louisiana is very different from New York. |
| |
|
| ▲ | calibas 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Our long term plan is for Jesus to come back and fix everything. I wish I was joking... |
| |
| ▲ | marcosdumay 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | AFAIK there's no fixing in the plan. They just expect Jesus to take them away and finish breaking everything down so everybody else suffers. I don't normally interact with people that believe that. But from a distance it looks like the second half is about as important as the first. | |
| ▲ | nielsbot 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I do think there are plenty of religious people out there who minimize the ill effects of climate change, believing (hope against hope?) that God would never let mankind destroy itself. Good luck with that. | |
| ▲ | MengerSponge 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That's the short term plan, baby! The long term plan is to be the elect who get raptured first. | |
| ▲ | actionfromafar 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And war in the middle east is going to make it happen faster! | | |
| ▲ | estearum 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Way too many Americans either don't know or disbelieve that a substantial chunk of the body politic, and now our elected and military leaders, actually literally believe this type of stuff. IMO any eschatological beliefs whatsoever should be 100% universally disqualifying for any political or military position, no matter what book title or special ancient zombie character they're filed under. | | |
| ▲ | notabotiswear 2 days ago | parent [-] | | “Leaders” who believe this kind of stuff don’t end up running developed states. It’s the leaders who know how to make use of morons who believe this kinda stuff who do. | | |
| ▲ | actionfromafar 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Hush now, you'll hasten the Antichrist. | |
| ▲ | estearum 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Eh, no. Trump of course has zero actual ideology, but there's pretty solid reason to believe e.g. Hegseth and Mike Johnson actually believe this type of stuff. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | rasz 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isnt he already running the country now? | | |
|
|
| ▲ | FireBeyond 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Exactly, we haven't even bothered or cared to rebuild much of Katrina's damage. |
|
| ▲ | dmm 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not even old town is safe. “Even if you stopped climate change today, New Orleans’s days are still numbered,” he added. “It will be surrounded by open water, and you can’t keep an island situated below sea level afloat. There’s no amount of money that can do that.” |
| |
| ▲ | Kim_Bruning 2 days ago | parent [-] | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polder Type 1 is often an island situated below sea level. For instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder . Island. Surrounded by open water because that's actually a good idea. Below sea level. 400 000 inhabitants. 2 cities, major agriculture, minor airport. Ever wanted to grab dinner on the sea floor? Visit Almere Center. Though lots of people find it to be a bit boring in person. Want the same sort of thing in the US? Consider dropping the Jones act. Right now it's illegal to bring the equipment that builds these things into the US. | | |
| ▲ | HWR_14 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The Jones act doesn't prohibit anything about bringing ships into the US to construct things. The closest reason I can think of you thinking that is it allows injured sailors to sue for damages. Maybe that equipment leads to a huge number of injuries? | | |
| ▲ | Kim_Bruning 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The cabotage provision of Jones act says a foreign (built) vessel is not allowed to move stuff between two points within US waters https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/46/55102 . There's also actually a separate dredge act too (now here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/46/55109) . So a crane like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvicq-kvVbw ; it picks thing up and sets thing back down. In US waters? Verboten ("nee meneer, helaas verboden", in this case). Sure there's workarounds with barges sometimes; but it gets silly. Or this rather large 'bulldozer' (a trailing suction hopper dredger) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhysyOJHY8A . Move mud from spot where it's unwanted to spot where it's needed. Operates in coastal/river areas. Fixes dunes, replenishes beaches, creates walls, places landfill; all at scale. Builds things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Islands, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maasvlakte_2 . Jones act and more specifically dredge act even: you're moving stuff inside US territorial waters. Both cases it's not (or barely) made in the US, and you can't hire the big crews from elsewhere. There's no competition, and this has resulted in no incentive to learn, keep up or even try. NB Heritage foundation on some of this: https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/113-year-old-law-h... |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | whyenot 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I am increasingly pessimistic about the long term future of the US. What are the chances that we will still be one country in a generation or two? Trump might have poured gasoline on the fire, but the federal government has been in decline for years. Congress is completely dysfunctional. The filibuster prevents the senate from doing anything. The president is at war with the civil servants and more interested in grift, punishing percieved enemies and erecting monuments to himself instead actually leading. Addressing climate change requires massive changes and a lot of political courage. There is none. |
| |
| ▲ | oscillonoscope 2 days ago | parent [-] | | There is no legal mechanism left that could correct course at this point. You would need to have a constitutional amendment to drastically reshape government and that's DOA. All that's left is snow decline and eventual dissolution | | |
| ▲ | dragonwriter 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The absence of a legal mechanism does not imply the absence of a mechanism (or even the absence of a peaceful mechanism.) While there is a legal process for amending the Constitution which, as you note, is likely intractable in the status quo conditions, Constitutional change—whether peaceful (even if there is the implicit consequence of force if compromise is not reached) or not—historically and globally is often an extralegal process that is retrospectively legalized, rather than a legal process under pre-existing rules. | | |
| ▲ | iamnothere 2 days ago | parent [-] | | A sufficient crisis could trigger an Article V convention, which already has a large amount of states pledged to join, but the changes coming out of such a convention probably aren’t going to be good for the public. | | |
| ▲ | dragonwriter 2 days ago | parent [-] | | An Article V convention is a legal process and Amendments proposed by such a convention have the same ratification threshold (which is the barrier, not the proposal threshold in Congress) as Amendments that are Congressionally proposed. Now, an Art V convention could be seized on as an opportunity for organizing extralegal change, but then Art V process obviously isn’t necessary precondition for that, just a potential opportunity. |
|
|
|
|
