Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (139655)	9/20/2005 11:12:24 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794396

Givens....... It's not about "givens"; it is about whether we wish to spend taxpayer money to rebuild a hurricane protection system so that a similar calamity is avoided in the future. I think Bush is right--it's affordable, it's what government does, and NO deserves a reconstruction as much as any city devastated by a 100+ year calamity. Your "nostalgia" is someone else's living history. If all the monuments in DC are destroyed or damaged in a terror event, I daresay you would be in favor of using taxpayer cash to rebuild them. If you indeed think so, the fault lines in your logic should be more than apparent. The 9/11 example you cited is one I wished to avoid, but since you mentioned it, the 1973 bombing by your logic should have been warning enough to vacate the WTC as it was a potent symbol which the Islamists desperately wanted to damage or destroy. If it was destroyed and people were killed after 1973, no tax payments should have been made as they knowingly assumed the risk of annihilation. I assume this is your position as it follows logically from your stance on NO.