I feel sorry for people, but that is a two block wide section of barrier island naturally no more than a few feet above sea level. What do you expect? It is crazy to build in locations like that and expect structures and land (sand piles actually) to last for the long haul. It is the natural order of things that barrier islands grow and diminish, roll over and arise elsewhere. When it is all said and done the Army Corps of Engineers will probably come in and spend tens of millions of dollars to restore the area (temporarily because nature will win again someday). Our country needs to get sane with spending, one house, one block and one inlet at a time.

The buildup of that area was done probably 80 to 100 years ago. Everybody in our generation took it for granted that although there would be some bad storms, nothing too radical would happen. And if it did, there was federal flood insurance. Those assumptions will change now, but we're deeply sympathetic to the lives that have been taken away or wrecked.

Video here.

Relax, Jack. It's Newleaf's god's will.

When watching the coverage last night, I was most worried about the places where there weren't any cameras.

Allan J, you are disgusting.

It does seem a little crazy to build so many houses on what looks to be nothing more than a sand bar.

Billions of dollars invested there. Not smart in retrospect. I wonder if they're insurable.

I recently heard a homeowner complaining about government intrustion into his personal life after having lived on a designated flood plain for 30 years without any flooding.

He was threatening to cancel his refinance (for which he'd already paid oer $500 in fees) because the lender was "forcing" him to buy flood insurance (per federal guidelines).

I'm sure he'd squeal the loudest if (instead) he found out his homeowner's insurance was worthless after a flood.

Speaking of insurance, I haven't heard this angle mentioned about our forefathers and the electoral college:

It's interesting that a state won't lose any say in the presidential election even if it is too busy dealing with a disaster to vote in regular numbers. In a weird way, the electoral college insures a state's power against hurricanes.

All those people who had their McMansions overlooking the shore were taking government subsidized flood insurance. Now they're probably standing in line for "free food, free [temporary] housing, free emergency care, whatever..." What a bunch of losers.

Many flood insurance polices do not include "storm surge".
Maybe now the subject of climate change will be addressed in a serious way.

Cue Pat Robertson blaming it on Snookie in 3, 2, 1...

Blaming the Wrath of God is no more specious than Al Gore suggesting that Anthropogenic Global Warming is causing catastrophic weather.

If you think that hurricanes in New England are something new, you need only search wikipedia for New England Hurricanes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_England_hurricanes

The Anti-Humanists (google "Deep Green Resistance") or Anarcho-Primitivists believe that humans ARE the problem. The primary differences between their approach and Al Gore's are opportunism and the magnitude of human suffering necessary to "solve" the problem.

Well, Al Gore and 98% of climate scientists.

Global warming is a commie myth perpetrated by godless smoke-free gays who sip pinot Noir.

Climate scientists agree the world's oceans are warming. Attribution of causality varies widely and I haven't seen any agreement as to how much reduction in greenhouse gases would be necessary to REVERSE the warming trend.

It's a much bigger leap of faith (not science) to suggest the warming trend is already producing more catastrophic weather events. To the contrary, this hurricane season was lighter than normal.

What distinguished Hurricane Sandy was it's northwesterly track which took it over the most densely populated part of the country. Global warming didn't locate all those people in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.