In your opinion, should populated places highly prone to natural disasters (such
ID: 1139306 • Letter: I
Question
In your opinion, should populated places highly prone to natural disasters (such as New Orleans) be rebuilt if a natural disaster does indeed occur and cause intense destruction? If another devastating hurricane were to hit New Orleans and again cause intense destruction, would you be supportive of using taxpayer funds to again rebuild the city? Although it can be argued that most places in the world are prone to some kind of natural disaster, should further development be encouraged in places where there is a high probability another natural disaster will happen? Consider other places in the world that have experienced natural disasters, such as the 2017 hurricanes in Houston and the Caribbean Islands, the December 2017 wildfires in Southern California, Nepal’s 2015 Earthquake, Oklahoma’s 2013 Tornadoes, Japan’s 2011 Earthquake/Tsunami, New Zealand’s 2011 Earthquake, Haiti’s 2010 Earthquake, and Southeast Asia’s 2004 Earthquake/Tsunami.
Explanation / Answer
Ans. This is a very interesting question , I'll be happy to answer this :
Before coming to my opinion in this regard let us first thoroughly examine both the sides of this Issue.
Many People Strongly argue that Spending Billions of Dollars on rebuilding the Disaster Hit Area is certainly a waste of government's money which is directly the Taxpayer's Money. For eg : Damage Done by Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans was $70 billion. They say that instead of spending money on rebuilding the disaster hit areas where disasters can occur again anytime in future , government should be spending the Money in Education , Healthcare , Sanitation and other crucial areas.
In contrast to this view , There are many people who are in favor of rebuilding the Areas. They argue that , What Would you suggest if your Home was shattered due to a Natural Calamity ? Would you suggest government not to help in rebuilding your house ? Certainly Not . They say that if we abandon the area instead of rebuilding it , it would result in Thousands of Families getting homeless , it would disrupt the entire community living there. Moreover With increasing Population , Pressure on Land is so much that we can't think of abandoning the areas which are already inhabitated. Many people support The Rebuilding of Disaster Hit Areas because abandoning it would displace millions of American Workers and would be a bad signal for the Economy.
Now that we have discussed Both the Sides Equally . Let's come to an Opinion. In my Personal Opinion , I strongly believe that Places which are Disaster Struck should surely be rebuild , but with Certain Changes . These Changes can be : Using Advanced Technology to make the area safe from Disasters , Analyzing the Cause of Disaster , like if the Disaster is man made then the Reason due to which disaster occurred should be corrected , If Population pressure is more in that area , then Some families can be shifted to other areas and given homes etc etc.This would prevent the Disaster from occurring again but if the disaster occurs , it would cause less damage.
Most of the Places that have experienced disasters have been rebuild again by taking various considerations into notice.
Yes , I would be supportive in rebuilding the area if another Hurricane hits New Orleans but with many changes. Because Rebuilding the lives of those affected by the Hurricane is much more important than just Paper Notes.
Suggestion - I have written my opinion in this answer but I would strongly recommend you to use your own insights too. This would surely help in widening your perspective.
I hope you understood the answer . Do ask in case of Doubts.
A Thumsup would be Highly Appreciated !!
Best of Luck !! Keep Chegging !!