Wouldn't it have been more logical to complete the levies Prior to rebuilding the housing in Louisiana?

Question

Some estimates put the levies at only 20% completed. I'm just saying even the time, effort and money (millions) given in volunteer monies to the area should have put the financial means for the levies first.

Answer 1

Nothing about the handling of New Orleans after Katrina makes sense.

Answer 2

No.  People needed places to live so that they could rebuild New Orleans.  Directly after the city was pumped out, there were nearly no hospitals, very few undamaged houses and apartments, very few undamaged hotels.  When you're rebuilding a place, or building, you need some place to live; you need some place to go when you get sick or injured.  Those were the priority.  

Did you go to New Orleans?  Did you see it?  The devastation was more than evident when I visited my friends who live there in January 2006; entire neighborhoods were still boarded up and abandoned in March 2008.  Did you feel its impact?  Did you deal with living in a place that saps your soul every day for all it looks like a war zone, day in and day out, trying to make some money at your job and then go home and spend all night trying to piece your house and your life back together again?  Have you ever lost everything all in one go?  Almost all your possessions, nearly all of your neighbors, nearly all of your shops, nearly all of your entire sodding city?  Has your home town ever been, for all intents and purposes, wiped off the face of the map?  

Until you've been through it, don't judge, don't even speculate.  You have no perspective, and no idea.

And, until you can figure out that the housing in Louisiana wasn't devastated, nor the levies in Louisiana, but rather the city of New Orleans, the town of Holly Beach, and other select areas, don't you even begin to think about larger matters than how to read a map.  The levies in Shreveport, Monroe, Alexandria, and Lake Charles were unaffected by either Katrina or Rita.