Ron Paul: No Federal Financial Aid for Tornado Victims

Originally posted by Question Fate

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.

thats how it already is, last time i checked

Think you need a hug, and as luck would have it, lot's of people willing to give them in the US and around the world....

reply to post by liejunkie01


He really is an ass; but all the PaulBots understand is "end the fed", "de-criminalize pot", yadda yadda. They never listen to the really stupid sh*t he says. This one being a prime example.

Ok, so let us assume that everyone in the tornado ravaged area HAS insurance. Their home is gone, their job is gone. What are they supposed to do while the insurance companies take their time getting around to doling out the settlements? Live in a tent? Make a lean-to from the debris of their former home? What are the businesses going to do while they wait for their insurance policies to pay off?

Paul says lots of ridiculous things that have no merit other than in his own twisted little world. But this one...this one is just damn mean. There is NO question that under such extreme circumstances the federal government must step in to help in the short term until folks can get back on their feet. That is what the gevernment is supposed to do.

The only people who disagree with this stance are those still stuck in only being able to think 1 or 2 steps forward or back.

If you can't see how we've actually *destroyed* our community safety nets by creating a "Federal" safety net... then you will never understand this point of view. Mankind survived for much longer than any governmental protection. Convincing people to stop learning how to take care of their immediate proximity and rely on saving from afar is convincing them to commit suicide... very slowly.

reply to post by Question Fate


The art of life is to make things better.

Originally posted by jaguarsky
reply to post by liejunkie01

 

He really is an ass; but all the PaulBots understand is "end the fed", "de-criminalize pot", yadda yadda. They never listen to the really stupid sh*t he says. This one being a prime example.

Ok, so let us assume that everyone in the tornado ravaged area HAS insurance. Their home is gone, their job is gone. What are they supposed to do while the insurance companies take their time getting around to doling out the settlements? Live in a tent? Make a lean-to from the debris of their former home? What are the businesses going to do while they wait for their insurance policies to pay off?

Paul says lots of ridiculous things that have no merit other than in his own twisted little world. But this one...this one is just damn mean. There is NO question that under such extreme circumstances the federal government must step in to help in the short term until folks can get back on their feet. That is what the gevernment is supposed to do.

Okay, what do you suggest the 'federal government' does? Put them in a FEMA camp?? Your comment makes no sense if you don't provide an 'alternative' solution.

Either way, if I just lost my home/job I will be THANKFUL that I purchased insurance and have at least something to expect down the pike. The real question is 'What happens to my family and I if we DO NOT have insurance and we just lost EVERYTHING??!!

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by Dragoon01

 

So are we going to become a nation of sociopaths? The whole idea of a civilization is banding together for the common good. I think the alternative, where everyone is out for themselves and no one else is what we call barbarism.

You aren't paying attention or understanding if you believe that the only alternative is "everyone out for themselves". It's exactly the opposite, it's encouraging stronger local communities who know better how to deal with local disasters and issues. It's also to encourage people to be *smart* about where they locate, how dense they let the population get, how risky their building methods are, etc.

These stances are there to *strengthen* the civilization by not creating a single choke point responsible for everyone. Federal Safety Nets weaken... nothing more. They encourage individuals, communities, and even a nation to make poor choices because "someone else" will come make it all better. It's building a civilization upon the premise of Moral Hazard:

In economic theory, moral hazard is a tendency to take undue risks because the costs are not borne by the party taking the risk.

We currently are living the sociopath nation (and world). You're just blinded to it right now because we've been trained since children to think upside down. It's walking us down a dead end.

Namaste.

reply to post by ErgoTheConfusion

The only people who disagree with this stance are those still stuck in only being able to think 1 or 2 steps forward or back.

Oh, right...if we happen to hold to different philosophies...we are just dumb.

Or maybe people actually have different opinions???

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Are all opinions equally effective?

I may have an opinion about how to throw a baseball, but that has no bearing on whether I can successfully throw a baseball.

Edit: Or to use a better analogy. I may have opinions about how to play chess, but will I be able to play more successfully if I only think 1-2 moves ahead compared to someone thinking 10-20 who is pulling from the centuries of chess playing experience passed down through time?

Moral Hazard destroys. It's all it really can do in the long run.

reply to post by jaguarsky

Paul says lots of ridiculous things that have no merit other than in his own twisted little world. But this one...this one is just damn mean.

So your saying when he is speaking about the constitution, that the constitution only exists in his twisted little world? Seriously how many Americans on ATS are actually American? That was probably the worse post I've seen on this thread so far. You need to school yourself big time, don't claim to be an American if you don't stand for what the Constitution says...

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I wouldn't live in a country of 50 loosely affiliated "states" that are all like mini-countries.

This was the original intent of the founders…

The separate States were supposed to be different in their laws and their societies. That way people could live with and be governed by others with live sets of values rather than have rule by the majority like we have now.

In their quest to homogenize American society under one uniform set of laws for personal conduct and the use of their heavy handed and illegal use of the power of taxation the Federal Government has all but taken States and local governments out of the legislative loop.

Awesome now my local laws have to conform to the whims and desires of urban progressive populations even though no one here actually shares those values…

Now all States can live under the ideals of America envisioned by the will of the larger States like NY, CA , OH and IL who have the largest populations and therefore the ability to dictate the national agenda to the larger but less populated States.

Note what all those States have in common?

They are broke…despite their high tax rates.

I personally want my State to be run different than IL, CA, NY and other crap hole liberal places – I’d rather it succeed.

Anyone who trusts FEMA after katrina needs to get there head examined. The federal government is incapable of handling disaster relief to much red tape. Leave it to the states... RP is right on with this, if you live in an area that could have some sort of natural disaster best prepare and get insured. If you live under sea level you better be prepared for it to happen again. To bad the states are just as broke as the federal government now so any major disaster would probably cripple the state and it's people to the point marshall law would have to take effect.

People really need to learn what the federal governments job's are. It's primary job is to protect this nation and the states. NOT to invade every aspect of our lifes, and give hand outs. Your state is there to protect your personal interests. Then again that's a republic and sadly we have been groomed to believe we all live in a wonderfull democracy.

(T)he States can best govern our home concerns and the national government our foreign ones. I wish, therefore…never to see all offices transferred to Washington, where, further withdrawn from the eyes of the people, they may more secretly be bought and sold at market. ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to Judge William Johnson, June 12, 1823

reply to post by Golf66

This was the original intent of the founders

The original intent of the founders was also to restrict women from voting and allowing blacks to be in slavery.

Forgive me if I don't worship the founders and respect their "original intent" so much.


The best thing the founders gave us was the ability to change the document and to adapt to current times.


Like I said....Old Thinking....I prefer to evolve forward...not regress backwards.

Originally posted by jaguarsky
reply to post by liejunkie01

 

He really is an ass; but all the PaulBots understand is "end the fed", "de-criminalize pot", yadda yadda. They never listen to the really stupid sh*t he says. This one being a prime example.

Ok, so let us assume that everyone in the tornado ravaged area HAS insurance. Their home is gone, their job is gone. What are they supposed to do while the insurance companies take their time getting around to doling out the settlements? Live in a tent? Make a lean-to from the debris of their former home? What are the businesses going to do while they wait for their insurance policies to pay off?

Paul says lots of ridiculous things that have no merit other than in his own twisted little world. But this one...this one is just damn mean. There is NO question that under such extreme circumstances the federal government must step in to help in the short term until folks can get back on their feet. That is what the gevernment is supposed to do.

I'm not even sure how to respond to some very "valid" concerns you made concerning the immediate needs people need in a disaster, how long it takes,even if they are insured to recieve those funds and recover, the impact of business's being closed and how that effects the economy and morale of the people directly involved in that community.

I would suggest however that we Will take care of each other in emergencies where tents, and lean-to's would be the exception and possibly a personal choice to those who decide to stay on thier land and rebuild.

I don't know, my brain hurts...I can only say that the only canidate I see as having at least enough respect for the American public and Faith in them to "tell it like it is" is Ron Paul...it's up to US to give him feedback and IDEAS on how to do things better, and I'm thinking he will listen and welcome the feedback.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
The original intent of the founders was also to restrict women from voting and allowing blacks to be in slavery.

Forgive me if I don't worship the founders and respect their "original intent" so much.

The best thing the founders gave us was the ability to change the document and to adapt to current times.

Like I said....Old Thinking....I prefer to evolve forward...not regress backwards.

It's evolution that makes it so if the federal government ever falls and becomes incapable of responding, every state and city in the nation will be left with no ability to survive on their own? That's evolution? Good luck with that.

Neural Networks are built bottom up. The part of the internet that will survive in the case of a big attack is strong because it's built bottom up. YOUR BODY is strong because it's built from the bottom up (despite what brains my try to believe). Ecosystems are built from the bottom up.

The examples of what are strong and what are weak are all around us... screaming at us to stop driving head first into a wall.

Do you have a job? If so... are there people "at the top" who are clueless about how you actually do your work day to day (if you haven't experienced this, search around, most people do)? Does it get in the way of your effectiveness when they come in and dictate to you? Would you be able to better serve their needs if they trusted you to do your job as only you know how to do your job?

There is nothing to prevent states from chipping in to help other states in case of a disaster. However right now, there is nothing to *prevent* some states from taking absurd risks to out compete another state, and then demand that state pay for their failures. This includes the emotional decision, for example, to build New Orleans back into a city rather than simply a port with enough infrastructure to support the port (which is easier to maintain and repair in case of Hurricane).

reply to post by ErgoTheConfusion


I disagree with his stance because I can think critically and as far as not thinking ahead, it's what I observe in a lot of his supporters. His ideas sound good, until you ask yourself "how does that work?" and you realize it won't turning all responsibility over to the states won't work because the states are broke.And let's not forget the golden rule, that those with the gold rule. It's a lot easier to buy off state governments than federal govt. what would happen in Ron Paul's America is feudalism, the nobles and the serfs, out in the open , and yes we are nearly there now, but he will finish it. Why do you think the far right hates the govt so much to begin with? It's the only think left protecting the serfs to some degree giving then some semblance of a social safety net. They want to remove that obstruction to total fascism and feudalism So in that respect he is on same page as the Koch brothers.

reply to post by nixie_nox


They don't get to track it. It is taken by the federal government, then dispersed by them. After that, the state has no control, and no knowledge of where it goes exactly. They don't know how much of the money that was taken to them went to building houses, building schools, water treatment, or what. Not to mention, FEMA employees are PAID(quite well). Where does that money come from? The states. But it is known only to FEMA and the federal government, how every dime of a states money is spent.

reply to post by BlackSatinDancer

this crap about insurance.... i lived in Florida and know for a FACT that in a hurricane and flood zone it is often damn near IMPOSSIBLE to get insurance for those things specifically. they don't want to touch you unless you practically bribe them with everything you own.

Actually, if you look a little closer you will find that flood insurance was easy until Katrina came along and the insurance companies wanted to bail themselves out. They were looking at what they thought was too big a hit and backed off of paying everyone. Was this right? No. But was it Ron Paul's fault? No again.

You have misidentified the villain. And where was all this sympathy when the folks in Mississippi were trying to pick up their pieces this last year. Now because it is an election year you are sympathetic? or is it just convenient now to make this a political football?

If you are so concerned why don't you send them some of your money? We won't stop you.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

The original intent of the founders was also to restrict women from voting and allowing blacks to be in slavery.

Stillwell,

Do you spin everything to suit you?

This is blatant misrepresentation.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


The reason FEMA exists is because they pull money from states... Money that the states could have aside for such disasters, Not to mention, that FEMA doesn't really do such a great job. Not to mention, the most important part. FEMA's main role is NOT aid. It is emergency management. Only a small part of that is relief aid. other parts of their agency deal with riot control, working with Military Civil Affairs, and the CDC. When you have agencies like FEMA, their employees are paid quite well. There is a ton of bureaucracy involved, Many people who get paid. Then what is left over, after paying hundreds of unnecessary employees, goes to some federal aid. If it were left to states, they could help out other states. Not to mention, if they weren't taxed so much, most states would be able to provide relief for themselves, with only small assistance from other states.

The federal government is not necessary in these situations. They make themselves necessary. It is not their job, nor do they have the authorization to do this. They are so busy pretending like they care, making themselves necessary, and trying to find ways to pay for all of it WITHOUT cutting their own salaries.

The federal government was limited in it's power and authority for a reason.

Originally posted by jaguarsky
reply to post by liejunkie01

 

He really is an ass; but all the PaulBots understand is "end the fed", "de-criminalize pot", yadda yadda. They never listen to the really stupid sh*t he says. This one being a prime example.

Ok, so let us assume that everyone in the tornado ravaged area HAS insurance. Their home is gone, their job is gone. What are they supposed to do while the insurance companies take their time getting around to doling out the settlements? Live in a tent? Make a lean-to from the debris of their former home? What are the businesses going to do while they wait for their insurance policies to pay off?

You should think about the things you say too....if you have insurance and your house gets destroyed go stay with a family member near by or a hotel. You will be reimbursed by the insurance company and if your car is destroyed also go rent a car. Its the STATE Government job to handle the situation before the FEDERAL Government. I've noticed a lot of people think as if there is only one form of government so naturally they think the Federal government is supposed to do everything. If you live in a disaster prone you should take full responsibility for that and if you really want to help them then donate money to them.

Only the media and people such as yourself make a big deal out of the pot talk. Whether a president is for it or against it is not going to be what decides whether people use it or not. So that point is useless its a cop out for people who can't have a real conversation. You just came out and attacked him without actually thinking. Did it ever occur to you that young people like him because he talks about freedom and liberty? Letting me keep the fruits of my labor is a very big deal for me. To look at my check and see no taxes taken out by the Federal government is enough to get my vote.You might make considerably more than me so its a non issue for you but for a lot of us its a big issue.