Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ron Paul: No Federal Financial Aid for Tornado Victims

page: 8
23
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by MastaShake
The only financial compensation that the people should be getting is from the insurance company. you live in tornado ally then you have tornado insurance, thats how its always been for my family atleast. even though our house has never gotten flattened weve had tornado insurance for the past 15 years, no reason others cant get it. the way i see it people are just being lazy because they know if the big one comes the governments gonna bail em out so why pay?


May I inquire about how much your family pays for tornado insurance, not being from an area that has them I have no idea?




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
He is right. It's not the federal governments job to help with that. It is a state issue and states can help all they wish to but the federal government should stay out of it.

People have been conditioned for too long to have the nanny government do everything for them. The federal government has..... or is supposed to have VERY limited powers and responsibility. Over the years they have just grown to the point they have their fingers in everybody's pie.

yeah, it's nice to get help in an emergency but it is not the federal governments role, or shouldn't be.

So yeah, Ron Paul is right on this one.

If anyone don't understand that go back and read the Constitution.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jacobe001
reply to post by arbiture
 


Sorry, I said it in haste and then regained my perspective.

This is all temporal in the long run anyhow, and the human condition will work itself out until the next cycle starts.


We all have our point of view, and get upset from time to time. Using words powerful as they are, is among the best way to express being pissed off.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Paul is right in a sense. Why should we rely on the federal government for such things? Look at the debt that is racked up. It's hilarious. What exactly do they do right?

In our town we have a video store that has setup a donation effort for one of the towns hit. All it takes is people helping each other to get things accomplished. Every little bit helps.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
RP just doesn't bend his own rules, guy sticks to his beliefs. you either like him or you don't



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


Do you know anything about RP? He wants to STOP sending billions to Israel, and every other country. He thinks our taxes should go to us, but our states should pay for state issues with state taxes. State taxes should go to helping us in these situations.

You start out criticizing him, and then agree entirely with one of the points he makes that he gets the most flak for.

Oh yeah, and I am from the area hit by these tornados and the last thing I want to see is fema and the government coming in. In Ky, people tend to take care of their neighbors and rely less on the federal government.
edit on 4-3-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by xMoralDeclinex
 





Another guy who is clueless as to the subject matter he is complaining about.


The subject matter is helping out your neighbor regardless what party line you follow......When he or she loses everything and has no place to stay, it is nice to get a helping hand to get you back on your feet.....Clueless, I do not think so,

I am against all politicians, including Mr Paul.......Is that clueless?



Ron Paul supports ending all foreign aid.


That is something I can agree on.




He also supports massive cuts in taxes and federal spending...which equates to more money in your pocket which would give you the ability to afford insurance and other everyday things.


How could I afford more things if there is no government money propping up the economy?

I am a union tinner and I got hired directly because of government spending. There are literally tens (hundreds) of thousands of jobs directly related to governtment funding. What does everyone do if there is no employment? I cannot make $15.00 an hour starting at Burger King.

How can people afford more if there are only minimum wage fast food jobs because businesses are not expanding because there is no funding to stimulate growth?

How many people in government would lose their jobs because of the cuts?




If you live in an area known for disasters and don't have insurance, why do you expect someone else to pay for your ignorance?


I do not expect anything from the government. What I am saying is that if someone needs help to rebuild their life then what is the problem with helping them..........

What I do expect is a government that helps their own peoplke before they help other nations.

Also by putting all of your eggs in the insurance's basket, you are giving them more control over what policies are being instituted in the government.

You don't really expect them just to knock on your door and hand you a check do you? You have to fight for every penny you "deserve" from the insurance institution.




If you are a stunt driver, and don't have health insurance, will you expect others to pay if you are injured? No.


I am not a stunt driver.

I am a working inividual that is trying to make it out of the gutter.........I do not expect anybody to pay for anything...but it would be nice if there was some programs to get me back on my feet after a bad situation.




Those like liejunk01 and Outkast Searcher eat up these kind of threads that are taken totally out of context, despite being members of a community that claims to "Deny Ignorance".


Did RP not say that he thinks that the federal government should not help these people in need? Did he not say to get insurance?

How did I take it out of context?

I say we need to help these people out.........We pay the taxes and they spend it. Why not spend the money on our own citizens? Federal or not?




By blatantly ignoring truth and not properly researching the subject matter, you are only encouraging ignorance.


Did he not say that the Fed should not help these people financially?

Incouraging ignorance is standing behind a politician that is a politician. I dislike all politicians because it is about the money. Even RP would ot be here without the dough.

Incouraging ignorance is coming in on someone's thread and bashing them because of their views on the political system in which we live....

Can you please tell me where I have ignored the truth?

Believing that one man can come in and change our whole society in one swift election is what is ignorant....That is the truth. I see it, obviuosly you do not.

One question why is'nt RP president then..........I know the answer....it is the truth.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jazzguy
 


And what if the states can't afford to provide that assistance?

Again, another reason not to support Ron Paul. I suspect he will lose votes in that area, even if those folks probably didn't plan on voting for him.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


And your post goes virtually unnoticed,,, see you are right.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


I have an even better idea.

Why not take that foreign aid and give it back to Americans in need?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


That's because he is a shill for Ron Paul that thinks that RP can do no wrong.

And the shills will continue to shout down those with a hint of common sense.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by mojo2012
 





Paul is right in a sense. Why should we rely on the federal government for such things? Look at the debt that is racked up. It's hilarious. What exactly do they do right?


Again FEMA's budget proposal for 2012 is only $1.8 billion.

I am not saying to rely on them, what I am saying is that money should be there to help out our
citizens.....Because we pay for it.




What exactly do they do right?


Since you asked I will say it again.

They helped out my mother in the time of need........Everyody wants to ignore the actual difference they can make in peoples lives.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by MountainLaurel
 


I pay 100.00 a year for EQ insurance and 1,200 for the rest. A comprehensive coverage which is rather rare for a manufactured home on 5 acres with several outbuildings. Oklahoma is tornado alley and we here in mo. are the pins...



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Oh yeah, and I am from the area hit by these tornados and the last thing I want to see is fema and the government coming in.


It is a shame too.

Fema can help you out. It is what they are funded for.

If you would take the time to educate yourself on what they are capable of helping you with, then you would change your mind.

If you pay for it, then why not reap the rewards that are offered?

If you are too proud then that is your problem.
edit on 4-3-2012 by liejunkie01 because: spelling



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


Exactly.

We pay taxes. They should go for something other than national defense.

If I were to lose my place of residence, there is no way I could afford to rebuild. If RP got his way, would I be forced to live on the street?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


I think it's cool that you can afford the insurance.

But, not everyone is as fortunate as you are. Keep that in mind.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


I have an even better idea.

Why not take that foreign aid and give it back to Americans in need?


That is an idea I can live with.

It should be that way.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 





If RP got his way, would I be forced to live on the street?


It sounds like if RP were to get his way, you would be joined in the street by many other americans such as yourself and I.

I do think we need to restructure our system but i feel his views are too extreme and would end up in a serious national crisis.

People want to ignore the fact that our way of life, in every little aspect is directly related to government funding of some sort.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by liejunkie01

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, stood by his libertarian beliefs on Sunday, saying that victims of the violent storms and tornadoes that have battered a band of states in the South and Midwest in recent days should not be given emergency financial aid from the federal government.

"There is no such thing as federal money," Paul said, on CNN’s State of the Union. "Federal money is just what they steal from the states and steal from you and me."

"The people who live in tornado alley, just as I live in hurricane alley, they should have insurance," Paul said.

Paul said there was a role for the National Guard to restore order and provide care and shelter in major emergencies, but that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) led to nothing but "frustration and anger.".

news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-no-federal-financial-aid-tornado-victims- 102533838.html

I would rather my tax money be handed out to my fellow americans, then to be thrown overseas..... lets help out the friggin world but not our own country.....

I thought that Ron Paul was for the people?

Oh, I get it,,,,,,,,,he is, only if you have insurance.......

You people are duped..........Paul is a crony just like the rest of the rich............

My mother went through the FEMA thing,,,,,they helped her out after a tornado tore her mobile home apart with my sister in it..................

I have no complaints with FEMA.............only rich jerks that want to rule everything......

For the people


Politicians of every make and model suck


I find of a lot of these threads against ron pauls positions to be somewhat funny. I mean I keep seeing them pop up over and over, saying "Look ron paul is against the federal government giving money for xyz!.." and though true, I don't really understand the point of them, they are hardly a revelation except to the ignorant.

The point is Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist and therefore is against federal aid. The fact that so many people today; especially the so called conservatives, rail against ron paul's position on federal aid and spending, shows that the most of the people are really out of touch with the history of the United States and the constitution on which it was founded and also the positions of constitutionalists like Ron Paul.

Here Op a little reading material for you outlining the history of Federal Aid for disaster relief...

source




Astonishingly few people today know that the early federal government of the United States accepted NO responsibility for providing direct immediate aid, such as tents, bedding, rations, cash, and (yikes) ice, gasoline, and hotel rooms, to citizens in the face of disasters, according to historian Gaines Foster in his informative book titled “The Demands of Humanity: Army Medical Disaster Relief.” (1) The practical reasons for this federal hands-off approach to providing direct immediate aid to domestic disaster sufferers before the Civil War were:
1. The “extremely small size of the federal establishment,
2. The concentration of its manpower in the capitol, and, especially
3. The lack of the means to send relief.” (2)





The philosophical reasons for the federal hands-off approach were:
1. Most early Americans strongly supported the concept of self-help and only depended on aid from private organizations and local or possibly state government as a last resort in the aftermath of disaster impacts, and
2. The US Constitution held NO clause relating to federal disaster assistance, and “a pervasive parsimony in Congress reinforced [these] constitutional scruples.”


So, as you can see you may not agree with Ron Paul's position on federal disaster relief, but his stance is hardly a surprise since he has always claimed to be a strict constitutionalist and prior to the civil war the federal government didn't render aid unless the disaster effected the federal government directly; such as in offering aid to ports that burned down which affected the Fed's ability to collect tariffs.

Anyway carry on your "Hey Ron Paul really is a strict constitutionalist! and continues to support strict constitutionalist positions!" thread.

*shakes head and walks away*
edit on 4-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typos



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


The people who claim that it's not the government's responsibility often forget that they ARE the government! You pay taxes. Where do they go?

We'll see if they're still saying that should disaster strike them.





new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join