How do you like dem ersters, Mayor Bing?

No no nothing like that. I think, actually, they're announcing that Mitch is buying a second home in suburban Michigan.

After he finishes knocking down all the houses in New Orleans, I guess.

Update: Before somebody jumps on me. I know New Orleans has a severe problem with blighted buildings and I know some of what the mayor is trying to do as far as expediting blight remediation is worthwhile. But at the same time the existence of so much vacant housing stock is also a manifestation of what the city has lost in population, in prestige, in economic activity both before the flood and (at an accelerated and unnatural rate) afterward.

And while watching New Orleans shrink over the years has been painful for most of us, for its elite classes, things couldn't have worked out better. Well to do New Orleanians have always pined for a smaller sleepier pond in which they would comfortably be the biggest fish. And by and large its political class has failed to do anything meaningful in terms of fighting this. So watching the mayor do the dismal work of amputating blood starved limbs from a dying patient and somehow declaring that a victory just doesn't sit well with me regardless of its necessity or inevitability.

Upperdate: Thinking along these lines, please see today's Lens op-ed. I've got issues with some of what the authors recommend and am more than a bit bemused at their optimistic "move forward" tone which I always find a little condescending. But they do have the problem diagnosed pretty well.

Claims that New Orleans is better off with a smaller population ignore the mounting challenges as federal aid decreases and the extent to which the footprint dilemma remains unsolved.

Low-lying, flood-prone neighborhoods that have achieved hard-won population gains over the past five years will not be abandoned or revert to semi-urban pastoral settings as some planners predicted. But without something to spark increased demand, these areas will languish as half- blighted problem centers, draining city resources and struggling to offer adequate safety and amenity to their residents.

If these neighborhoods are again to become viable, safe and attractive communities, New Orleans must commit to an all-hands-on-deck effort to regrow its population. Without the buoyancy of strong population growth, no feasible amount of government investment will lure sufficient private capital into these neighborhoods.

Despite arguments advanced by some advocates of a smaller footprint, the broad goals of economic and environmental sustainability and the revival of low-lying communities are not at odds with one another; they are interdependent . The city cannot sustain itself if it lacks a population large enough to build a globally competitive economy and secure the infrastructure projects needed to mitigate environmental risks and adapt to a changing landscape. We know all too well that Washington or Baton Rouge will not lead that effort for us. The city itself must set an ambitious population goal, and do everything we can to reach it safely. This will require creative policy changes and collaboration across agencies and institutions.

In 2006, despite Nagin's silly rhetoric, it was actually Mitch Landrieu who talked seriously about restoring the city's population not just to pre-flood levels but to its mid-century peak. Four years later, Landrieu had come back to talking mostly about crime and blight. Patrick is already on my case in the comments regarding blight mitigation despite my best efforts to head this criticism off. Yes of course this stuff has to be done. But we've regressed to a point where we think it's all that needs to be done.