Quadrillion dollar lawsuit.

[BacktoBasics]

These people need to shut the fuck up and get a job already.


NEW ORLEANS - Hurricane Katrina's victims have put a price tag on their suffering and it is staggering — including one plaintiff seeking the unlikely sum of $3 quadrillion.

A whopping $3,014,170,389,176,410 is the dollar figure so far sought from some of the largest claims filed against the federal government over damage from the failure of levees and flood walls following the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane.

Of roughly 489,000 total claims, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said it has received 247 for at least $1 billion apiece, including the one for $3 quadrillion.

"That's the mother of all high numbers," said Loren Scott, a Baton Rouge-based economist.

For the sake of perspective: A mere $1 quadrillion would dwarf the U.S. gross domestic product, which Scott said was $13.2 trillion in 2007. A stack of one quadrillion pennies would reach Saturn.

Some residents may have grossly exaggerated their claims to send a message to the corps, which has accepted blame for poorly designing the failed levees.

"I understand the anger," Scott said. "I also understand it's a negotiating tactic: Aim high and negotiate down."

Daniel Becnel, Jr., a lawyer who said his clients have filed more than 60,000 claims, said measuring Katrina's devastation in dollars and cents is a nearly impossible task.

"There's no way on earth you can figure it out," he said. "The trauma these people have undergone is unlike anything that has occurred in the history of our country."

The corps released zip codes, but no names, for the 247 claims of at least $1 billion. The list includes a $77 billion claim by the city of New Orleans. Fourteen involve a wrongful death claim. Fifteen were filed by businesses, including several insurance companies.

Little is known about the person who claimed $3 quadrillion. It was filed in Baker, 93 miles northwest of New Orleans. Baker is far from the epicenter of Katrina's destruction, but the city has a trailer park where hundreds of evacuees have lived since the storm.

Katrina, which is blamed for more than 1,600 deaths in Louisiana and Mississippi, is considered the most destructive storm to ever hit the U.S. It caused at least $60 billion in insured losses and could cost Gulf Coast states up to $125 billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Most of the claims were filed before a deadline that coincided with Katrina's second anniversary, but the Corps is still receiving them — about 100 claims have arrived over the past three weeks — and is feeding them into a computer database.

The Corps said it isn't passing judgment on the merits of each claim. Federal courts are in charge of deciding if a claim is valid and how much compensation is warranted.

"It's important to the person who filed it, so we're taking every single claim seriously," Corps spokeswoman Amanda Jones said.

[1369]

Handy hint:

If you live lower than water level, and if aforementioned water level lives next door to you, you're doing it wrong.

[CubanMustGo]

Send all claims to

The Estate of Hurricane Katrina, deceased

[Bob Loblaw.]

Hopefully we win this case. If I take my usual cut, that 3 quadrillion dollar case oughta set me for life. Then I can retire and devote my days to the Bob Loblaw Law Blog.

[to21]

3 quadrillion pays for a lot of 40oz's.

[Cry Havoc]

Handy hint:

If you live lower than water level, and if aforementioned water level lives next door to you, you're doing it wrong.

QFT.

[samikeyp]

"Let's see what you wagered: Eleventy billion dollars. That's not even a real number."

"Yet."

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q67/mpaceleo/99qjeopardy2.jpg

[Soul_Patch]

lol


quadrillion

[Extra Stout]

L O U I S I A N A

Seriously, we get more news about stupid people doing stupid things from that one state* than the other 49 combined.

*To be fair, most of that is just the Spears family.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

This is ridiculous. Obviously the quadrillion claim is BS, but the rest of the billion claims are lazy ass people looking to get set for life. 1 billion?? I mean, come on!

[T Park]

God bless the tort system.

And some want to vote in Edwards. HELL MAKE IT WORSE :lol

[FromWayDowntown]

I understand that some of these claims ask for outrageous sums of money. Fortunately, federal courts will be the ultimate arbiters of the claims. But with that said, is anyone really arguing that the government shouldn't be liable for some of the losses these people incurred, particularly where the Corps has admitted that its levees were inadequately designed and caused the destruction?

I'm not saying that a $1 billion claim is reasonable, but I also find it odd that some would apparently think that losses caused by the government's admitted negligence shouldn't be compensable.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I understand that some of these claims ask for outrageous sums of money. Fortunately, federal courts will be the ultimate arbiters of the claims. But with that said, is anyone really arguing that the government shouldn't be liable for some of the losses these people incurred, particularly where the Corps has admitted that its levees were inadequately designed and caused the destruction?

I'm not saying that a $1 billion claim is reasonable, but I also find it odd that some would apparently think that losses caused by the government's admitted negligence shouldn't be compensable.

I'd say that the people getting sued should be the local levee boards, who took the millions of dollars the federal government gave them for levee upkeep and spent the money on local good ol' boy projects, including *building a casino*.

But those are the cousins, uncles, and dads of those filing some of these suits, so can't have that. Blame the white man in D.C. :rolleyes

[FromWayDowntown]

I'd say that the people getting sued should be the local levee boards, who took the millions of dollars the federal government gave them for levee upkeep and spent the money on local good ol' boy projects, including *building a casino*.

But those are the cousins, uncles, and dads of those filing some of these suits, so can't have that. Blame the white man in D.C. :rolleyes

If that's true, then that's part of the government's defense to the claims. The government, however, hasn't argued that its funding was misspent -- it has, seemingly, accepted blame for the fact that the levees weren't properly built in the first instance. Maybe that's misguided on the part of the federal government, but it is, apparently, the posture of the claims.

If the failure to build proper levees to protect against the problems associated with hurricanes -- as the government acknowledges -- played a role in destroying these people's homes, don't these people have some right to be compensated for their injuries by that government?

[1369]

If that's true, then that's part of the government's defense to the claims. The government, however, hasn't argued that its funding was misspent -- it has, seemingly, accepted blame for the fact that the levees weren't properly built in the first instance. Maybe that's misguided on the part of the federal government, but it is, apparently, the posture of the claims.

If the failure to build proper levees to protect against the problems associated with hurricanes -- as the government acknowledges -- played a role in destroying these people's homes, don't these people have some right to be compensated for their injuries by that government?

Assumption of risk for living in a flood plain?

[BeerIsGood!]

A stack of one quadrillion pennies would reach Saturn.


Damn, that would buy a lot of Popeye's Chicken and Biscuits.

[mavs>spurs2]

I wonder what Tpark. has to say about all this

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

I wonder what Tpark. has to say about all this

You're about the only one.

[ShoogarBear]

You laugh now, but if this guy wins, won't you feel the dumbshit?

[mavs>spurs2]

You're about the only one.

I happen to think the Tpark. troll is actually pretty funny

[FromWayDowntown]

Assumption of risk for living in a flood plain?

I'm not so sure -- particularly if the government offered assurances to someone in the chain of title that its levees were properly constructed and would protect against this type of incident.

You pretty much lose an assumption of risk defense if you make promises that entice people to take that risk.

[timvp]

Get on the ball, FWD. This is your chance

Ten percent of one quadrillion dollars?

:hungry:

[Gerryatrics]

I was thinking of submitting a claim to FEMA for the flooding we had here. I'm not nearly as greedy as these guys though, I would probably settle for 2.5 quadrillion.

[cherylsteele]

Hopefully we win this case. If I take my usual cut, that 3 quadrillion dollar case oughta set me for life. Then I can retire and devote my days to the Bob Loblaw Law Blog.
Is it me, or does this person look like Scott Baio?

[BeerIsGood!]

Is it me, or does this person look like Scott Baio?

Look up the tv show "Arrested Development"

It's a Scott Baio character.

[cherylsteele]

Look up the tv show "Arrested Development"

It's a Scott Baio character.
Oh....I never watch the show....sorry.

[TDMVPDPOY]

htf can you sue teh govt over a natural disaster which was out of their control?

thats just plain stupid, if they succeed, the precedent will just fuck up america a new one in the future since ur region is prone to natural disasters....

INSURANCE get it jackass....

[phyzik]

Handy hint:

If you live lower than water level, and if aforementioned water level lives next door to you, you're doing it wrong.

+1,000,000,000,000,000

Im sorry, I agree with Handy Hint, if your THAT fucking stupid to live in a flood plain, fuck you! Now Im just waiting for that cesspool California to drop off the west coast and listen to all the "Woa is me" bitches for living on a fault.

"Duh, We are gonna rebuild, derherherher!"

Im not a fucking moron, if my house gets flooded out and its possible to happen again.... IM FUCKING MOVING!!!!

Got damn, it fucking amazes me how fucking stupid people are, its a wonder we aren't extinct! Thank God for people like me :fro

Floods and fires = Darwinism at work.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Maybe these lawsuits are more about NO residents being left to fend for themselves, and then the city not being rebuilt for the affected residents. Aren't swathes of the city still wasteland? If my government let me down three times like that (bad levies, no assistance during crisis, slow rebuilding), I think I'd be suing the fuckers for as much as I could get too.

Idealistic I know, but governments are meant to be there to help people in situations exactly like this and they failed over and over and over again.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Floods and fires = Darwinism at work.

If you are talking about Darwinian evolution by natural selection, um no. Most of the people who lived there during Katrina lived there because they grew up or worked there, so their reason for being below the water level was not blatant stupidity. Most of the affected areas were poor, and poor people have lower mobility levels (they simply don't have the money to move). The flood affected thousands of people regardless of their level of "survivability" or "fecundity", so it has nothing to do with natural selection. In fact, natural selection doesn't really operate on humans in the modern developed world any more because social factors like income and education level have a far great effect on survival and fecundity than any "natural" factors. Poor people in the third world are still subjected largely to natural selection though.

[BeerIsGood!]

If you are talking about Darwinian evolution by natural selection, um no. Most of the people who lived there during Katrina lived there because they grew up or worked there, so their reason for being below the water level was not blatant stupidity. Most of the affected areas were poor, and poor people have lower mobility levels (they simply don't have the money to move). The flood affected thousands of people regardless of their level of "survivability" or "fecundity", so it has nothing to do with natural selection. In fact, natural selection doesn't really operate on humans in the modern developed world any more because social factors like income and education level have a far great effect on survival and fecundity than any "natural" factors. Poor people in the third world are still subjected largely to natural selection though.

Our more modern and advanced culture has reduced the Darwinism by natural selection, but there is a new form of "natural selection" at work that still separates many, something that hasn't really been coined yet as far as I know. It is in regards to death from technology for those who are too stupid or inexperienced to use it properly (i.e. automobiles). Stupid people will always find a way to fuck up and die young, unfortunately they can now take you or I with them through abuse of technology.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Our more modern and advanced culture has reduced the Darwinism by natural selection, but there is a new form of "natural selection" at work that still separates many, something that hasn't really been coined yet as far as I know. It is in regards to death from technology for those who are too stupid or inexperienced to use it properly (i.e. automobiles). Stupid people will always find a way to fuck up and die young, unfortunately they can now take you or I with them through abuse of technology.

I would argue that technology hasn't just "reduced" natural selection, it has removed it from the equation for much of the planet's human population. A great example of this is antibiotics - they have now saved billions of lives that would otherwise have been lost to microbial infections under natural selection.

As for "Stupid people will always find a way to fuck up and die young" - really? I think a lot of very stupid people don't died young because they are saved by modern technologies like seat belts, or societal rules against dangerous behaviour that they choose to obey. The Darwin Awards are funny, but few people kill themselves through sheer stupidity. I've had two friends die in their late-teens/early 20s, both smart guys - one in a car crash as the passenger of a drunk driver (he did a dumb thing, but he was not generally a stiupid person), and the other of leukemia. Sorry, but your statement is overblown.

You are talking about "social" selection or social evolution, there's nothing "natural" about it. There is a lot of sociological, ecological and economic literature out there on this subject.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

On a side note, the idea of Social Darwinism, which I won't explain (read the wiki) gets into some touchy ethics when it comes to eugenics and what's good for the human race:

"Despite the fact that social Darwinism bears Darwin's name and his works were widely read by social Darwinists, the theory also draws on the work of many authors, including Herbert Spencer, Thomas Malthus, and Francis Galton, the founder of eugenics. Darwin himself gave serious consideration to Galton's work, but thought the ideas of "hereditary improvement" impractical. Aware of weaknesses in his own family, he was sure that families would naturally refuse such selection and wreck the scheme. He thought that even if compulsory registration was the only way to improve the human race, this illiberal idea would be unacceptable, and it would be better to publicize the "principle of inheritance" and let people decide for themselves.[1] In The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex of 1882 he described how medical advances meant that the weaker were able to survive and have families, and commented on the effects of this, while cautioning that hard reason should not override sympathy, and considering how other factors might reduce the effect –

'Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. ... We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely that the weaker and inferior members of society do not marry so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage, though this is more to be hoped for than expected.[2]'"

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

Have a read, it is interesting stuff!

[Soul_Patch]

I think im going to sue olive garden for giving me the shits today..


i think one brazillion dollars would suffice.

[BacktoBasics]

I don't give a fuck what any of you say. I don't care what fucked up way you can justify this bullshit and the bullshit that has ensued because of this. Life fucking sucks and no matter how much engineering you put into something when introduced to a massive larger than above average catastrophic event you can't guarantee anything. There isn't an endless pile of money to develop each and every structure in this world, there has to be some tolerances but not infinite.

These people are asking for compensation for a one in over a million event that was controlled for the most part by mother nature. They deserve assistance which they have recieved for two plus years and they deserve some compensation to rebuild but to ask for million or quadrillions of fuckillions is a complete waste of time and resources.

We have illegal immigrants that can jump a fence find gainful employment and start a life completely under the radar all while not even speaking the language ten times faster than any one of these worthless life sucking time wasting victims. They should have fled instead of pompously sticking it out like a bunch of lazy....well you know.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The federal government shouldn't have to bail someone out with millions of dollars for an act of God. Particularly when they knew it was coming.

It's pretty comical that the city is filing suit as well, those idiots had the government offer everything on a platter but were too incompetent to take advantage of it. Next time the government gives you millions of dollars for levy repairs, spend it on the fucking levy - not building a casino.

Fuck 'em.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm not so sure -- particularly if the government offered assurances to someone in the chain of title that its levees were properly constructed and would protect against this type of incident.

You pretty much lose an assumption of risk defense if you make promises that entice people to take that risk.

If I remember right the government always stated that the levies were built to spec to hold against a category 3 hurricane. Katrina was a strong 4, nearly a 5.

Everyone in New Orleans knew what would happen if a 4/5 hit them. They chose to live there. Come on. They were living in a bowl, below sea level, protected by levies built to withstand a category 3, and were hit by a strong 4.

At what point is the government responsible for common sense of the people?

[FromWayDowntown]

If I remember right the government always stated that the levies were built to spec to hold against a category 3 hurricane. Katrina was a strong 4, nearly a 5.

I guess, then, I wonder why the corps of engineers has accepted blame for the failure. If it was the strength of the hurricane that caused the levees to fail, why acknowledge that it was, instead, a consequence of improper construction?


Everyone in New Orleans knew what would happen if a 4/5 hit them. They chose to live there. Come on. They were living in a bowl, below sea level, protected by levies built to withstand a category 3, and were hit by a strong 4.

I understand that, but I also think that if the government is going to tell people that it built levees that would protect them during certain types of storms, people rely on that representation, and then their homes are destroyed because the levees weren't built to the standard the government claimed, there's a degree of responsibility that falls to the government.

If you buy a car that claims to have seatbelts that will protect you in a crash and then are injured when the car is in a crash and the manufacturer admits that your injuries came from a problem with the seat belt, should the manufacturer be immune from liability because you assumed the risk that their promise was a good one? That concept is completely foreign to the law.


At what point is the government responsible for common sense of the people?

Perhaps at the point that it gives unwarranted assurances that the things its doing to protect people will protect them and those who are injured have relied upon those assurances.

[BacktoBasics]

If you buy a car that claims to have seatbelts that will protect you in a crash and then are injured when the car is in a crash and the manufacturer admits that your injuries came from a problem with the seat belt, should the manufacturer be immune from liability because you assumed the risk that their promise was a good one? That concept is completely foreign to the law.


So its ok to sue if the seatbelt failed during a massive Tornado. I mean its designed to protect you right?

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

This is what we get for Thomas Jefferson cheaping out and not getting the extended warranty and coverage. Still, I say send the bill to the frogs.

[FromWayDowntown]

So its ok to sue if the seatbelt failed during a massive Tornado. I mean its designed to protect you right?

If the manufacturer says that you were injured because the seatbelt was supposed to protect you in the event of a tornado, sure. No manufacturer is going to say that.

It's not as if these people are saying that the levees failed to protect them from a bomb or something. The levees were supposed to divert rising water away from these areas; they did not do that. The government has said that it is resposible for the levee failure. After all of that, the government should bear no financial responsibility to those who were harmed as a result of that failure? I don't see that being reasonable at all.

[BacktoBasics]

These people are asking for compensation for a one in over a million event that was controlled for the most part by mother nature. They deserve assistance which they have recieved for two plus years and they deserve some compensation to rebuild but to ask for million or quadrillions of fuckillions is a complete waste of time and resources.

I never said they didn't deserve compensation. I said its getting fucking ridiculous and its a giant waste of time to deal with these greedy idiotic dumbshits. I'm not arguing over a 100k lawsuit here we're talking about millions and trillions and quadrillions and enough already. These people need to get off their asses and get a job and stfu already.

Not to mention wasn't it stated before that the structure was designed to protect against cat 3 not a 4 or 5.

[ploto]

Somehow I doubt these people had millions and billions of dollars in property damage and loss of income.

[Holt's Cat]

Some of the responses in this thread are amusing considering how the Feds aren't so forgiving when they expect something of you.

[Holt's Cat]

Somehow I doubt these people had millions and billions of dollars in property damage and loss of income.


Black folk own shit too. (http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2005-09-09-katrina-damage_x.htm)

[FromWayDowntown]

Not to mention wasn't it stated before that the structure was designed to protect against cat 3 not a 4 or 5.

Then why is the Corps of Engineers accepting responsibility for the failure?

[BacktoBasics]

Then why is the Corps of Engineers accepting responsibility for the failure?
Lets do this the right way. Link me an article and we'll take the debate from there. Although I never stated that they didn't deserve some kind of compensation.

This could be as simple as "yes they were built to withstand a CAT 3 not a 4 or 5, you guys didn't sign up for the 4 or 5 job you signed up for the discounted CAT 3 build sorry it failed cheap loser"

[FromWayDowntown]

Lets do this the right way. Link me an article and we'll take the debate from there. Although I never stated that they didn't deserve some kind of compensation.

This could be as simple as "yes they were built to withstand a CAT 3 not a 4 or 5, you guys didn't sign up for the 4 or 5 job you signed up for the discounted CAT 3 build sorry it failed cheap loser"

This is from the article that you posted to start this thread:


Some residents may have grossly exaggerated their claims to send a message to the corps, which has accepted blame for poorly designing the failed levees.

[CuckingFunt]

Levee system was poorly designed, and there had been reports circulating for years at both the local and federal level stating that the New Orleans area was pretty much fucked if hit directly by a hurricane.

The quadrillion dollars is just plain ridiculous and could/would never hold up in court, but I think that the assertion that the people in this situation should just shut the fuck up and get a job might be going a bit far. Government failed to properly handle the situation before AND after the hurricane at every level and in every manner conceivable and I think people are well within their rights to be pissed off about it.

[FromWayDowntown]

Lets do this the right way. Link me an article and we'll take the debate from there. Although I never stated that they didn't deserve some kind of compensation.

This could be as simple as "yes they were built to withstand a CAT 3 not a 4 or 5, you guys didn't sign up for the 4 or 5 job you signed up for the discounted CAT 3 build sorry it failed cheap loser"

For what its worth, I agree with you that the claims that are being made are, in some cases at least, outrageous. That's unfortunate because there surely are some claimants who are making perfectly reasonable claims and they are being unfairly vilified in the general contempt for those who are seeking recompense. I don't think anyone should realize a windfall from this, but I do object to the suggestion that these people don't deserve anything for their losses.

[Melmart1]

Another point to add is that many of these people were homeowners. Their homes were destroyed and they have neither the credit nor the capital to buy a new home wherever they may have settled.

Their tiny little shotgun houses may not be much to some, but it was all they had in the world and many were paid off. Now they are forced to pay rent on something they will never own because of incompetence. While I can't see give them millions/quadrillions, etc they do deserve some compensation.

Oh, and Katrina was only a 3 when it hit New Orleans. It was stronger when it hit Mississippi, then weakened before hitting Louisiana. So the argument that the levees weren't meant to hold such a strong storm is erroneous. They were meant to hold this type of storm and didn't.

[ChumpDumper]

The levees certainly weren't designed to fail in the manner they did, and the ACoE admits that their construction does not and did not meet the standards to which they were designed.


Katrina made it clear that floodwalls on the 17th Street Canal were in no shape to defend against a major hurricane. Ostensibly built to tolerate storm surge almost 14 feet above sea level, one section of floodwall and levee adjacent to Lakeview failed against water estimated at no more than 10 feet.

Now, a geotechnical analysis of the canal, perhaps the most exhaustive ever performed, indicates that the Lakeview breach was hardly the canal's only weak spot. In fact, almost none of the floodwall sections between Lake Pontchartrain and Pump Station No. 6 can handle the design capacity of 13.9 feet of water, according to the study.

The yearlong study, conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers primarily to determine the canal's "safe water level" for the 2007 hurricane season, divided the 4.8 miles of walls and levee into 36 sections to analyze just how much storm surge each can withstand.

It found that only two sections, those closest to Pump Station No. 6 and on the high ground of Metairie Ridge, can hold more than 13 feet of water. Many other sections of walls and levees can't be counted on to contain more than 7 feet of water.

http://blog.nola.com/times-picayune/2007/08/corps_analysis_shows_17th_st_c.html

So several sections of the levee couldn't even handle half the water they were designed to. By its own admission, the federal government fucked up big time.

[timvp]

I love the "well the dumbsh!ts shouldn't have lived in a floodplain below sea level, the ingrates needed to get a job and move before Katrina hit" take. When the big one strikes San Francisco and San Francisco becomes one with the Pacific Ocean, is there going to be a similar take?

"Well the dumbsh!ts shouldn't have lived on a fault line near the ocean, the ingrates needed to get a job and move before the big one hit" ... yeah, I doubt it.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I understand that, but I also think that if the government is going to tell people that it built levees that would protect them during certain types of storms, people rely on that representation, and then their homes are destroyed because the levees weren't built to the standard the government claimed, there's a degree of responsibility that falls to the government.


The parents of one of my clients were born and raised and lived all of their lives in NO. He said there was no mystery at all as to what would happen in New Orleans if a big storm hit. His parents' home was submerged when the levees broke.

It sucked and they were disappointed to say the least, but they knew what was going to happen when Katrina came along. They got the hell out of there.

[DontHatethePlayer]

OK - while I don't agree with some of the comments being made, I do have to ask where do we draw the line?? We are building in places we shouldn't be building because we can't live without the view or we have to be near the water. Look at the increase of alligator attacks because we are developing land in swamp areas and encroaching on their habitat. You get rid of their food source, they will find another. Look at these homes in California built on the side of a hill supported by stilts and we are shocked when they are taken out by a mudslide.

I realize that you can't really compare the two because the people in New Orleans probably thought that they were building in a "safe" area because of the claims of the government. But, after they HAVE seen what can happen, they still want to rebuild in those same areas??!! Come on. Where's the sense in that? Are we rebuilding because we have to prove that a hurricane isn't going take us down?? News flash...I don't need a glass ball for this one. Perhaps, we need to quit thinking we can take on Mother Nature and win - whether we are the government or anyone else!!

[BigBeezie]

3 quadrillion pays for a lot of 40oz's.

...and Swisher Sweets. Hell, it will buy all the weed in Compton.

[ploto]

Black folk own shit too. (http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2005-09-09-katrina-damage_x.htm)
You misssed the point completely-- not TOTAL damages-- but the damages of ONE person suing for 3 quadrillion dollars-- or the 247 people each suing for a billion dollars. You really think they EACH had one billion dollars in property damage and loss of income? You really think ONE person lost 3 quadrillion dollars in Katrina?

[peewee's lovechild]

I'm waiting for the Texas Panhandle to sue GOD for all the fucking tornados.

They better sue for Quadrizillions. GOD can afford it.