Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: John Woodgate <jmw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 20:14:27 +0100
I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <richgrise@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote (in <pan.2005.09.06.23.18.22.913324@xxxxxxxxxxx>) about 'OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful', on Tue, 6 Sep 2005:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 17:39:42 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:In article <qY2QxbYiUcGDFwD7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Woodgate <noone@xxxxxxx> wrote:I read in sci.electronics.design that Fred Bloggs <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote (in <4319B5E3.9020007@xxxxxxxxxx>) about 'OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful', on Sat, 3 Sep 2005:
It is the short-sighted who build on the short site...The fact is that it will be more economical to rebuild than to re-site the city.
Will you recite your reasons for that conclusion? (;-)
I think Fred is just reciting what he's heard about the costs of re-siting the site without citing his references. I can't get too excited about the idea.
Excite - isn't that the thing between the insite and the outsite?
No, you need more insight. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. If everything has been designed, a god designed evolution by natural selection. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk .
- References:
- OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: Anthony Fremont
- Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: Fred Bloggs
- Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: John Woodgate
- Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: Ken Smith
- Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- From: Rich Grise
- OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- Prev by Date: Re: Is New Orleans finished ?
- Next by Date: Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- Next by thread: Re: OT: followup on New Orleans - disgraceful
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|