I certainly know that New Orleans is huge. I've lived there for one, and being that I have a degree in Transportation Management, of which New Orleans is a central hub of in the US, I'm familiar with its' infrastructure and importance. But economic loss is economic loss, whether it's industrial seaport developments or high wealth housing.
If Katrina is $100B (and this will probably go up) and Andrew was $25B ($43B in today's dollars) -- why so much more aid, 400 times more, for one than the other.
I'm personally wondering if this is some sort of appeasement, or perhaps just a sense of reality, from the Administration/Congress. I can't even begin to imagine the reaction if Congress only appropriated $1.5 Billion (roughly 4 times the aid given to Andrew for 4 times the damage) for Katrina victims while sending $30 Billion over to Iraq. My God how the [censored] would fly.
Or it could be simply because the State of Florida was better-suited, economically, to deal with a pricetag of $25 Billion than Louisiana is with... well, any price-tag. 1992 was a time of excess for many State's budgets. Certainly far more than today, particularly with the likes of Louisiana.
