It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
Originally posted by BellaSabre
I saw and heard him on "Candy Crowlely, State of the Union" on CNN this morning.
This is *exactly* what he said. There should be no funds for states who have had a catastrophe. Even.. "They have their own National Guards".
I disagree strongly with that position. Good lord, what would have happened during Katrina if it hadn't been for federal intervention?
You guys go ahead, just don't move to California, Florida, Texas, Louisiana or anywhere else prone to disasters, and the way things have been going lately, good luck with that.edit on 3/4/2012 by BellaSabre because: (no reason given)
Your just missing the point of what he is trying to say. The states should have all the resources they need to take care of the problem, not the FED! He should have started with the FED is a disaster itself and our tax dollars should not be supporting FEMA. Homeland Security has stolen our State officers and now makes them powerless to address these critical state issues. Unless FEMA does everything right then people are SCREWED!
be careful they will call you a socialist or commie for espousing social respinsibility
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by resist2012
What don't you understand about a single State alone not being able to fund something like FEMA on their own.
When a large disaster strikes...a State may recieve more FEMA aid than they have ever paid into it. If they are left on their own during that disaster...once their money dries up...then what?
You expect other States that are in the same situation to freely give up all their stored up resources when they have nothing to fall back on either? What happens when the next month that State that offered aid has a disaster of their own, but now instead of being to provide some aid...they can't provide any aid. Now they have to turn to multiple states and ask them to give up their own funding?
And what about states like Wyoming? Large state...lots of land...few people. How are they supposed to provide the same level of aid and support that FEMA could provide?
Be careful, if you throw the idea out there of working as a group f the benefit of all, you will soon be branded a socialist or worse.
You see the craziness of all this. Working together collectively is much better than lone wolfing it.
Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by nixie_nox
"you have a pretty good chance of getting hit by car which is why you need car insurance but tornadoes are random events"
Yup. They came up with the name "tornado alley" for no reason whatsoever.
That is just a media term. ARe you able to officially define it? I don't think so. Tornadoes are reported in every state. I have seen a tornadop path cross a ski slope in Conneticut.
So since tornadoes are found in all lower 48, are you suggesting that every American homeowner get tornado inusurance? Do you work for an insurance company?
Further, I guess "flood zones" are just random areas that were picked for fun.
And people get denied because their 130 year old house was built pre insurance era in a 25 year flood plain. So what is the homeowner to do then?
And don't think it happens. The insurance companies hire geologists to study this to death. Your rates shoot up and if your at risk you are denied for coverage.
But they have our best interests at heart, right???
Aren't insurance companies all noble??
Why do people not have common sense?
If you live in the Gulf, you get hurricane insurance.
If you live in the plains, you get tornado insurance.
If you live in a flood zone, you get flood insurance.
If you choose not to, why should you get a check from the taxpayers?
Why can't ATSers seperate insurance from immediate emergency need?
Why is this so complicated?
where are all these houses that the federal government bought for disaster victims?
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by jimmyx
I am surprised they have not outlawed any house without a basement in tornado prone areas.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by hdchop
Can You not read - RP states that it isour money and states money NOT FED money that they "Stole" from us - In Other words - He is saying it's our own money were recieving back... And he is correct....
The problem with this thinking is that there are times when there is a disaster that is so large, that the State uses all funds they have available, they take in all the money that they have paid out to the federal government...and yet...they still have need for more aid.
What do you do then in Ron Paul's world?
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by resist2012
The state does deal with it and track it.
The state pays for it first and then applies for reimbursement.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by resist2012
What don't you understand about a single State alone not being able to fund something like FEMA on their own.
When a large disaster strikes...a State may recieve more FEMA aid than they have ever paid into it. If they are left on their own during that disaster...once their money dries up...then what?
You expect other States that are in the same situation to freely give up all their stored up resources when they have nothing to fall back on either? What happens when the next month that State that offered aid has a disaster of their own, but now instead of being to provide some aid...they can't provide any aid. Now they have to turn to multiple states and ask them to give up their own funding?
And what about states like Wyoming? Large state...lots of land...few people. How are they supposed to provide the same level of aid and support that FEMA could provide?
You see the craziness of all this. Working together collectively is much better than lone wolfing it.
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by resist2012
What don't you understand about a single State alone not being able to fund something like FEMA on their own.
When a large disaster strikes...a State may recieve more FEMA aid than they have ever paid into it. If they are left on their own during that disaster...once their money dries up...then what?
You expect other States that are in the same situation to freely give up all their stored up resources when they have nothing to fall back on either? What happens when the next month that State that offered aid has a disaster of their own, but now instead of being to provide some aid...they can't provide any aid. Now they have to turn to multiple states and ask them to give up their own funding?
And what about states like Wyoming? Large state...lots of land...few people. How are they supposed to provide the same level of aid and support that FEMA could provide?
You see the craziness of all this. Working together collectively is much better than lone wolfing it.
Certainly would agree with you that we should all work collectively, BUT does FEMA represent the "spirit" of the public's best interest and what people actually believe it does?
Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by Dragoon01
I think the alternative, where everyone is out for themselves and no one else is what we call barbarism.