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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (318112)	12/31/2006 7:55:31 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1591605

"How was the Katrina cottage flawed?" The basic concept is great. They got every detail right, and have every reason to be proud of what they did. The flaws come in with their basic premise. FEMA pays $35k for a trailer of about 300 square feet. So they took a budget of $35k and a limit of 300 square feet and went with it. As a result, they would up with a house that costs about $116 per square foot. That cost should be a lot lower. I mean, it is nice that the cottages can be flooded and are mold resistant, with a metal roof and all those good qualities. But what is really needed is something that can be quickly, cheaply and easily built. They need to be transportable without a lot of effort. And hookup for water, electricity and sewer needs to be simple and quick. Because the likely scenario is that areas would be cleared and prepped for high density occupation. As soon as that is done, families are moved into them until their own lots can be cleared and prepped. Then the houses are moved there for final siting. This would take a lot of organization to pull off, but it would reduce the disruption of communities, the need to keep people in hotels for months or years and probably be a lot cheaper to boot. And we won't look like a country full of morons who are incapable of dealing with a disaster.