The danger is that all the professionals and siloed agencies will rush in with the plan of rebuilding to match the past. It would be much better if we could first think of the goal (kind of society) and then plan on how to get there, taking into account further likely disruptions (eathquakes, plagues) and building for extreme flexibility.
We need this because we need to take apart the sytem we have and buld a very diffeent one if we are to deal with climate hange and population.
Rebuilding especially Florida, but Houston has similar opporunities, can be the classroom/laboraty campus to set the model.
kind of society
- less materialistic
- less private property
- mores serious education
- more health
- use of product to create not private consumption but leisure, political participation, arts.
- More relationships.
I think of EriK Erikson’s eight stages of the human life cycle as a template against which to measure plans.
- I think of Olmstead’s approach to urban planning with parks and nature
- I think of Waldorf/Montessori approaches to education.
- I think of Manbiot’s approach to wilding the environment
- and building on the incredible world wide interest in better cooking
- Art in all its forms.
GardenWorld Politics - the book 
2 initial issues:
1. Even if we are all well-meaning, well-intentioned folk, we each have different backgrounds, access to “facts”, and skillsets / tools for dealing with what information each of us is able to utilize. So we come up with different approaches, conclusions, perspectives, values, judgments, critiques…
2. Not all of can be *assumed* to be well-meaning, well-intentioned folk. Some are out to game / take advantage of whatever the game is, with whatever is used to keep score.
IMHO, some extreme (probably not complete or perfect) transparency is called for, as well as well-considered measures for how to handle sociopathic behavior and entities.
Love – Sam