Why are we still seeing devastating floods despite spending billions on対策?

Because we aren't paying enough in water utility fees.

Or at least, that's what the American water authorities want us to believe. Across the EU, the entire conversation regarding flooding has shifted—but the bureaucrats running our local water management agencies here in the States are still keeping us in the dark, all while they scramble to demand billions more in taxpayer money.

The real truth about these floods:
http://www.slideshare.net/uscemure/k...lavama-6799140

The presentation pretty much covered it all😳

I can confirm the facts presented here are accurate.
After spending 40 or 50 years obsessed with river regulation, the EU has finally stumbled upon scientific evidence showing these measures often cause more harm than good. Over-regulation essentially funnels too much precipitation into major waterways—the big rivers running through massive cities and densely populated regions. In the past, those excess waters would just spread out into natural retention areas and floodplains. That’s what we used to call a flood.
That doesn't mean we should abandon all regulation entirely—that would be naive. But the whole concept of water management is shifting. It’s just foolish to force a specific area to be "regulated" and dried out if it ends up causing even worse damage somewhere else down the line (look at the massive flooding across Europe since the 90s).

Another undeniable fact: the US Armed Forces, much like any other government entity, serve as a playground for graft. We see endless stupid, unnecessary, and overpriced projects that end up having negative consequences in the medium term. It’s no different from what you see with Amtrak, the shipbuilding industry, or whatever else is waiting to be exposed.
At this rate, sheep farming might actually become a viable career choice soon.

coppercyclist2 said:I can confirm the facts presented here are accurate.
After spending 40 or 50 years obsessed with river regulation, the EU has finally stumbled upon scientific evidence showing these measures often cause more harm than good. Over-regulation essentially funnels too much precipitation into major waterways—the big rivers running through massive cities and densely populated regions. In the past, those excess waters would just spread out into natural retention areas and floodplains. That’s what we used to call a flood.
That doesn't mean we should abandon all regulation entirely—that would be naive. But the whole concept of water management is shifting. It’s just foolish to force a specific area to be "regulated" and dried out if it ends up causing even worse damage somewhere else down the line (look at the massive flooding across Europe since the 90s).

Another undeniable fact: the US Armed Forces, much like any other government entity, serve as a playground for graft. We see endless stupid, unnecessary, and overpriced projects that end up having negative consequences in the medium term. It’s no different from what you see with Amtrak, the shipbuilding industry, or whatever else is waiting to be exposed.
At this rate, sheep farming might actually become a viable career choice soon.

And I suppose playing the harmonica at a local folk festival is considered a top-tier cultural event now, too?🙂>