Response To Should We Abandon Louisiana? In some ways, we already have.

I read the article called "Should We Abandon Louisiana? In some ways, we already have" by Zack Kopplin. Zach Kopplin talks about how the media isn't covering the flood. Kopplin says that the disaster wasn't enough of a selling point-its the media conspiracy that gets people to a car. I somewhat agree with that statement, the media won't cover it unless it is seen as a threat to the people. The media thrived off of creeping out Americans and getting people worried about anything that is not even a threat. The media made their money off of commercials and as more viewers you have, the more money they charge. It doesn't matter what the topic is, just as long as people are watching, and the name of the media company doesn't have a bad reputation. Quite a lot of the media coverage originated in local stations. The conglomerates will pay for the videos from the local news, and use 12 seconds of it just to fill in a space that was empty. Media coverage brought help and financial aid to areas that have been affected by disasters. This article is also in first person.

Remaking most of the homes affected by the flood is a big job. It will be a few years before most of the houses are indeed rebuilt. A few homes have already been fixed, but many homes have not. I think that we, as a community, should rebuild these homes because the legacy of the past is still here, and the U.S. has never abandoned an entire state before, and I hope they don't plan to. If we end up abandoning Louisiana, it will be a place for disease to manifest and the wildlife will most likely be hurt. There are a lot of fossil fuels that are in Louisiana, and many are economically valuable to the United States' needs. Nuclear power plants in Louisiana might explode and contaminate other areas of the country. Rebuilding the homes now would be the better decision, and it would be much better for the future generations to live and prosper in Louisiana.