So again, farmers are less important than city folk

And the lower down on the river, the less important you must be.

Rather than flood a few farm acres farther north, and rather than flood any major town or city, the Army Corps of engineers has decided that farmers downstream are less important than those upstream, and that the cities are more important than the farms.

While I understand that those folks in the cities do not want their homes destroyed, their property flooded, and their possessions waterlogged, that is part and parcel of living behind a levee and near a river. Why are the possessions of folks in a larger town or city more valuable than the possessions and homes of folks in a more rural setting? How do you put a price on someone's home? Who pays for the damage? Who pays for the loss of cropland for a year or more, much less who determines the real damages when a farmer loses a years worth of crops?

If we are going to have those in government make these value decisions, then we should save the millions and millions of dollars which are spent each year in flood control measures, and let the water inundate everyone as nature intended.....Rather than make decisions based upon who lives where and their relative value. Alternatively, let us remove all of the levees (just think of the temporary jobs that that exercise would create!) and let the water spread out as it did in the past. That way, nearly everyone would flood, but not by tens of feet, but rather by a foot or two at most.

Is that farmer, or those people in the subdivisions about to be flooded by the actions of the Corps of Engineers  as protected by those actions as the folks in the cities they are trying to save? Are we not all equal in the eyes of the law?

Someone is getting screwed by the government, to the benefit of others apparently deemed more valuable.

And it ain't right.

Especially if their damages are paid for by tax dollars.