• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Eric Cantor And Disaster Relief

Do you agree with Eric Cantor that disaster relief must be offset elsewhere?


  • Total voters
    34
The United States is the richest and greatest nation on the face of the earth, I find it sad indeed that there are some people who are unwilling to help citizens in need. My bet is that many of you folks would borrow money to help your family in a time of need. Sad indeed. :(

I wouldn't take out a $250,000 loan when I was making $25,000 a year.
 
I wouldn't take out a $250,000 loan when I was making $25,000 a year.

I couldn't agree with you more, but its rather immature to assume all people who need help irresponsibly spend, dont you think? There are good, honest, God Fearing, responsible Americans who recently LOST EVERYTHING they had by no fault of their own. Sometimes people have it all together and suddenly they are struck with a deadly illness like cancer. You understand that one single shot for white blood count is between 3-8 thousand dollars. That's just one shot. These otherwise responsible people have to sell of everything they've spent their lives working for just to pay for their medical bills... and they STILL need help.

Think of all the Military families on Food Stamps... is it because they're "irresponsible"? How about your Doctors Medical Receptionist? How much do you think they get paid? Gas station managers? Day Care workers?... you cant be SO jaded all you see is the bad in everyone, can you?

Every hear of "empathy"?
 
Your conservative Governor, Chris Christie, praised FEMA, what's up with that?

Only a skewed view of the world sees things only one way all the time. I believe Chris Christie has also praised President Obama in the past as well... not everyone is a political hack and fits into little pigeon hole characterizations found in the funny papers.
 
I couldn't agree with you more, but its rather immature to assume all people who need help irresponsibly spend, dont you think?


I've never made that point. My point was that the government has been irresponsible in their spending.
 
I couldn't agree with you more, but its rather immature to assume all people who need help irresponsibly spend, dont you think? There are good, honest, God Fearing, responsible Americans who recently LOST EVERYTHING they had by no fault of their own. Sometimes people have it all together and suddenly they are struck with a deadly illness like cancer. You understand that one single shot for white blood count is between 3-8 thousand dollars. That's just one shot. These otherwise responsible people have to sell of everything they've spent their lives working for just to pay for their medical bills... and they STILL need help.

Think of all the Military families on Food Stamps... is it because they're "irresponsible"? How about your Doctors Medical Receptionist? How much do you think they get paid? Gas station managers? Day Care workers?... you cant be SO jaded all you see is the bad in everyone, can you?

Every hear of "empathy"?

I don't think he is seeing bad in everyone. When I saw the 250K loan statement when making 25K, made me think of the US govt.
How much more do you want to go in debt as a country? We are trillions in the hole, are currently borrowing 40c on every dollar the Feds spend. We should put Americans first, yet we spend billions elsewhere, on pork projects, etc. We have to get our fiscal house in order or we will go down the tubes.

Yes, we need disaster assistance to local, county and State level. Yes, some private citizens needs help. We just can't keep printing and spendin money at the federal level at the rate we are.
 
Ever consider forced empathy is no better than no empathy at all?

I'm forced to pay for all kinds of things I dont feel I should have to pay for - but that's just the way it is. And yeah, forced empathy isn't any better than having than no empathy at all.
Regardless, I dont know how people look themselves in the mirror knowing they care so little about their fellow human beings. And worse: when a Christian does it. Since they were commanded to love their neighbor as 'they love themselves' it stands to reason that if they saw a person hungry, or in need of help, they would reach out to that person and care for them 'as they would themselves'
Of ALL the programs we can cut from, suggesting we gut all the social ones says a lot about a person.

I dont always LIKE the truth, but I can take it just fine ... it would be nice to see people just admit that they dont want to help others instead of hiding their selfishness behind the Constitution.
 
That's part of the problem. Too many believing that it's up to the government to provide for them anytime things aren't going the way they expect it to.

I kind of agree with that. My point is that the same people who go to Tea Party rallies and moan about "big government spending" are the first ones in line when something happens to them. It wasn't that long ago that we had a whole thread on here with Conservatives lamenting lack of Federal action on wildfires in Texas. The same people who say things about how "the government isn't responsible for you, blah blah.."

Just wait until there's a natural disaster in Cantor's district. I bet he'll be the first one looking to get Federal money.
 
I dont always LIKE the truth, but I can take it just fine ... it would be nice to see people just admit that they dont want to help others instead of hiding their selfishness behind the Constitution.
I for one have never stated "gut" all of the social/entitlement programs. Reform those that need it, eliminate duplicate programs, look for efficencies, needs to be looked at for all programs the Feds are involved in. It is selfish to hide behind beliefs and hand your grandchildren and great grandchildren a debt that they may not be able to pay. Many believe we should help Americans before helping the world.

In order to carry out what you would like to see in helping those in need, don't you think the Congress needs to take a hard look at where it is spending our tax dollars? I think they do. They need to look at the tax code for revenue, loopholes, etc. They need to elimate wastefully unnecessary spending, and do a better job of prioritizing where tax dollars go.
 
We wouldn't have this discussion if Obama had spent 4.1 trillion on his watch.
 
I don't think he is seeing bad in everyone. When I saw the 250K loan statement when making 25K, made me think of the US govt.
How much more do you want to go in debt as a country? We are trillions in the hole, are currently borrowing 40c on every dollar the Feds spend. We should put Americans first, yet we spend billions elsewhere, on pork projects, etc. We have to get our fiscal house in order or we will go down the tubes.

Yes, we need disaster assistance to local, county and State level. Yes, some private citizens needs help. We just can't keep printing and spendin money at the federal level at the rate we are.

And the only programs America can think to cut from are social programs? How about taxing the rich as well as corporations? Legalize Marijuana and tax it? Bring jobs back to America so the unemployed can go back to work? RAISE wages to a 'living' ones so all these people out here working low paying -though important- jobs can make enough money to live and not NEED to ask for 'handouts'?

Perhaps the CEO of Walmart wouldn't have to consider their employees as "freeloaders" if Walmart paid a little better? A Fast food franchise owner making 300k a year kicks their own min wage employees around for needing 'handouts' and getting most of their income taxes back, but refuses to ask million/billionaires to pay more! Why is the bulk of the burden placed on the shoulders of the needy?

People need to take "personal responsibility" I hear. Fine, fair enough. But why doesn't that same 'personal responsibility' apply to the Rich?

And as far as "state and local" Governments helping with disaster clean up and helping the poor, just where are they going to get their money? For all the good CPS does, have you any idea of what a complete MESS the system is? Its a state program and not a single state can get its crap together... I'd hate to see the fallout should Federal Funding be taken away.

I've said it before and Ill say it again. You have to have a better plan than "State Government" or "Private Organisation" as an answer when asked how things will be paid for. It's a shallow answer and people need more than that.
 
I kind of agree with that. My point is that the same people who go to Tea Party rallies and moan about "big government spending" are the first ones in line when something happens to them. It wasn't that long ago that we had a whole thread on here with Conservatives lamenting lack of Federal action on wildfires in Texas. The same people who say things about how "the government isn't responsible for you, blah blah.."

Just wait until there's a natural disaster in Cantor's district. I bet he'll be the first one looking to get Federal money.

and I'll go further and say that the very people screaming "big Government" expect the same "big Government" to define and regulate something so personal as marriage. They insist "big Government" cant force them to wait a week to get a gun, but expect the same "big Government' to force women into giving birth.
Also, I have family in MS screaming 'big government' who gladly collected FEMA after Katrina.. even had the nerve to complain when they had to use their own retirement money to pay for whatever FEMA wouldn't.

Just wait till they have to depend on Haley Barbour for help. He'll tell them to bolt their dresser to the wall and say a prayer... that's about it

Anyway, the inconsistency is enough to keep a person spinning endlessly ... never mind the issues.
 
I can agree with the greatest nation, don't think we are the richest. We borrow 40c of each dollar spent by the feds, we are trillions in debt. How is that rich?
You can't measure the wealth of a nation by what it owes, our debt is just a very small pittance what we're worth. Trust me.

So you want us to continue to spend the way we are going and cover all disasters on top of it. So we incease our debt to future generations. How about balancing our budget, get rid of the debt and live within our means. We should get loans on amounts we can reasonably afford to pay back.
In my opinion, the Federal Government should help it's citizens when it's warranted. If part of California fell into the Pacific Ocean, I would expect the Government to help. The same thing if a terrorist set off a Nuke.

We need to cover disasters. Some of it can be planned for based on past history of events. When the amount is exceeded Congress needs to redirect funds and stay within budget. It is a matter of priorities. We do it as individuals, the govt. should be also.
I disagree.
 
I kind of agree with that. My point is that the same people who go to Tea Party rallies and moan about "big government spending" are the first ones in line when something happens to them.

You are certainly free to state an opinion here.

It wasn't that long ago that we had a whole thread on here with Conservatives lamenting lack of Federal action on wildfires in Texas. The same people who say things about how "the government isn't responsible for you, blah blah.."

Just wait until there's a natural disaster in Cantor's district. I bet he'll be the first one looking to get Federal money.

He might be and hopefully at that time we will have our debt more in line and can afford to. The arguement is not that it's bad to help out. They arguement is it's bad to continue spending with no regard to our debt situation.
 
And the only programs America can think to cut from are social programs? How about taxing the rich as well as corporations? Legalize Marijuana and tax it? Bring jobs back to America so the unemployed can go back to work? RAISE wages to a 'living' ones so all these people out here working low paying -though important- jobs can make enough money to live and not NEED to ask for 'handouts'?

Perhaps the CEO of Walmart wouldn't have to consider their employees as "freeloaders" if Walmart paid a little better? A Fast food franchise owner making 300k a year kicks their own min wage employees around for needing 'handouts' and getting most of their income taxes back, but refuses to ask million/billionaires to pay more! Why is the bulk of the burden placed on the shoulders of the needy?


Fast food jobs were NEVER intended to be a job you get to support your family on. They are introductory jobs, You know, there is no way you would go in and pay $7.50 for your Big Mac.

And as far as "state and local" Governments helping with disaster clean up and helping the poor, just where are they going to get their money? For all the good CPS does, have you any idea of what a complete MESS the system is? Its a state program and not a single state can get its crap together... I'd hate to see the fallout should Federal Funding be taken away.

Where exactly do you think federal funding comes from? It comes from the people in the states.

I've said it before and Ill say it again. You have to have a better plan than "State Government" or "Private Organisation" as an answer when asked how things will be paid for. It's a shallow answer and people need more than that.

Perhaps so but we are having this discussion because the federal government has done a piss poor job at handling the money they have been gave.
 
Only a skewed view of the world sees things only one way all the time. I believe Chris Christie has also praised President Obama in the past as well... not everyone is a political hack and fits into little pigeon hole characterizations found in the funny papers.
I completely understand your point, not everyone on the left agrees with everything. But Chris Christie is very well respected by conservatives and I believe he will run for President in the future, possibly 2016. I don't believe Cantor's view is a winnable one for somebody runing for POTUS. Even Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia doesn't agree with Cantor.
 
this is a perfect example of politifact in action - as Cantor is not saying that it is not the role of the Federal Government not to help with natural disasters (as some conservatives do), there is no flip.

The "flip" is over the urgency of payment. When it was his district, "immediate action" was necessary. There were to be no conditions; no concessions for taking time to find the funds. Now, however, when its politically expedient, its ok to have prerequisite conditions such as finding the money in the budget (which will take a ton of time) before money is disbursed.
 
Last edited:
Phys, that's great for you Christians. We heathens have a different way of looking at the world. ;)

Who said I was or wasn't a Christian? I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy of conservative Christians to refuse to take care of their neighbors.

We wouldn't have this discussion if Obama had spent 4.1 trillion on his watch.

I'm going to repeat something I said in an earlier discussion.

When metro Miami got hit by a Category-5 hurricane in 1992, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When the Upper Midwest got hit by a massive flood in 1993, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When LA got hit by a large earthquake in 1994, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When Oklahoma City suffered a terrorist attack in 1995, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When metro Oklahoma City got hit again, this time by a tornado in 1999, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When New York City suffered an even bigger terrorist attack in 2001, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When Florida got slammed by a hurricane in 2004, federal relief efforts were a NON-ISSUE.
When New Orleans practically went underwater in 2005, federal relief efforts were certainly questioned, but the actual funding itself was a NON-ISSUE.

And now, all of a sudden, for this latest round of disasters that seem to all be hitting at once, federal relief efforts are a political issue.

This does not have a god damn thing to do with Obama. This has everything to do with the fact that the Republican Party is infested with uncivilized people. They have absolutely no regard for human life after conception. To them, one dollar is more important than one life. They do not care. As far as they are concerned, hurricane victims can drown, and tornado victims can literally be blown away. All I can say is, if that's really the route they want, part of me wishes they'd lead by example and be the first to walk the plank.
 
We wouldn't have this discussion if Obama had spent 4.1 trillion on his watch.
You are sadly misinformed, Obama hasn't spent $4.1 trillion on his watch.
 
I completely understand your point, not everyone on the left agrees with everything. But Chris Christie is very well respected by conservatives and I believe he will run for President in the future, possibly 2016. I don't believe Cantor's view is a winnable one for somebody runing for POTUS. Even Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia doesn't agree with Cantor.
It certainly depends on the state of the country. What may be un-winable today may change in the future.
 
And the only programs America can think to cut from are social programs? How about taxing the rich as well as corporations? Legalize Marijuana and tax it? Bring jobs back to America so the unemployed can go back to work? RAISE wages to a 'living' ones so all these people out here working low paying -though important- jobs can make enough money to live and not NEED to ask for 'handouts'?

Perhaps the CEO of Walmart wouldn't have to consider their employees as "freeloaders" if Walmart paid a little better? A Fast food franchise owner making 300k a year kicks their own min wage employees around for needing 'handouts' and getting most of their income taxes back, but refuses to ask million/billionaires to pay more! Why is the bulk of the burden placed on the shoulders of the needy?

People need to take "personal responsibility" I hear. Fine, fair enough. But why doesn't that same 'personal responsibility' apply to the Rich?

And as far as "state and local" Governments helping with disaster clean up and helping the poor, just where are they going to get their money? For all the good CPS does, have you any idea of what a complete MESS the system is? Its a state program and not a single state can get its crap together... I'd hate to see the fallout should Federal Funding be taken away.

I've said it before and Ill say it again. You have to have a better plan than "State Government" or "Private Organisation" as an answer when asked how things will be paid for. It's a shallow answer and people need more than that.

Ok you seem to like our deficet spending. You miss understood. I said we need to provide state/local with assistance ."Yes, we need disaster assistance to local, county and State level.

So you support continue deficit spending?
I have come to the conclusion some Liberals can't be helped.
 
Fast food jobs were NEVER intended to be a job you get to support your family on. They are introductory jobs, You know, there is no way you would go in and pay $7.50 for your Big Mac.

Where exactly do you think federal funding comes from? It comes from the people in the states.



Perhaps so but we are having this discussion because the federal government has done a piss poor job at handling the money they have been gave.

I am aware of this. But the REALITY IS, people do depend on those kinds of jobs. Even more-so since so many people have lost their jobs, homes & savings. What was "intended" and what really happened are two very different things. And young, single people working min wage jobs have to be able to get an education of some sort if they plan to make more money someday. So if you take away Federal Student loans and keep paying them crappy wages - even as the cost of living rises - how are they going to rise above min wage jobs?

Also, I personally know a thing or two about McDonalds wealth. Franchise owners depend on those "dead end" positions for their wealth, and the corporation depends on the franchise for its wealth. So dont be so quick to insult, and crap all over the very people who keep the rich mans business from circling the drain by handling the daily operations and providing quality service that brings customers - and their money - back.

... all for a crappy 7.25, mind you.

A little FYI: there was a time my husband and I made 90k a year. In a matter of months the housing market went to crap and everything changed for the construction industry. So, he went to work off shore in the Gulf tearing down broken oil rigs for a "dead end" 9 bucks per hour. 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. He didn't sit around on his hind playing victim or blaming illegals .. he went 2k miles away for a juicy 9 bucks per hour so his family could stay afloat. Overtime pay is truly a treasure, 1Perry. Anyhow, that was a long time ago ... still, you shouldn't be so condescending when it comes to min wage workers.

Honestly, people should be paid a living wage. I dont know for sure how it would work since the cost of living varies, but perhaps it could be regional. I do know that 15.00 per hour goes a bit further in Oklahoma than it does in WA State. We have a higher sales tax, higher rent, higher cost to buy a home, more people and so on. Same can be said for a lot of states. And dont forget, "low income" people pay regressive taxes. So really, when it's all said and done, there isn't a whole lot of money left. God forbid they be struck with a terminal illness.

Lastly, Federal funding comes from Tax Payers. I am aware of this as well. So ... pay them more and they wont "get so much back". Voilà!
Will the states not have a heavy tax since there will be no Fed Gov to help fund things? Or will the mysterious "private organizations" fund everything for their states citizens? Who will fund the "private organizations" I wonder?
And yes, the Government doesn't always budget very well and could use reform, but even that's not good enough of an answer. Why give us the obvious when what we're asking for are solutions?

Depth would help.
 
Last edited:
I am aware of this. But the REALITY IS, people do depend on those kinds of jobs. Even more-so since so many people have lost their jobs, homes & savings. What was "intended" and what really happened are two very different things. And young, single people working min wage jobs have to be able to get an education of some sort if they plan to make more money someday. So if you take away Federal Student loans and keep paying them crappy wages - even as the cost of living rises - how are they going to rise above min wage jobs?

If you want Federal Student Loans, cut something else out. How many loans could we make with what the bombs dropped on Libya cost? The arguement is not that these things should not be available, it's that they must somehow be paid for.

Also, I personally know a thing or two about McDonalds wealth. Franchise owners depend on those "dead end" positions for their wealth, and the corporation depends on the franchise for its wealth. So dont be so quick to insult, and crap all over the very people who keep the rich mans business from circling the drain by handling the daily operations and providing quality service that brings customers - and their money - back.

Crap on? I've worked those jobs also. There is nothing wrong with these sorts of jobs. The only problem is in thinking one should be able to live off of them. In the end it's also all a viscous circle. Raise the wage to $15.00 an hour, the guy making $15 an hour demands $20 because his standard of living has taken a huge hit and so on to where the person making $15 an hour is in the same position the person making $7.25 is now.

... all for a crappy 7.25, mind you.

You are running a cash register. A needed job but hardly one that should be anything but what it is.

A little FYI: there was a time my husband and I made 90k a year. In a matter of months the housing market went to crap and everything changed for the construction industry. So, he went to work off shore in the Gulf tearing down broken oil rigs for a "dead end" 9 bucks per hour. 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. He didn't sit around on his hind playing victim or blaming illegals .. he went 2k miles away for a juicy 9 bucks per hour so his family could stay afloat. Overtime pay is truly a treasure, 1Perry. Anyhow, that was a long time ago ... still, you shouldn't be so condescending when it comes to min wage workers.

LOL. I said that there is a place for minimum wage jobs. I was really appreciative for the ones I had. I have no idea where you get condescending.

Honestly, people should be paid a living wage. I dont know for sure how it would work since the cost of living varies, but perhaps it could be regional. I do know that 15.00 per hour goes a bit further in Oklahoma than it does in WA State. We have a higher sales tax, higher rent, higher cost to buy a home, more people and so on. Same can be said for a lot of states. And dont forget, "low income" people pay regressive taxes. So really, when it's all said and done, there isn't a whole lot of money left. God forbid they be struck with a terminal illness.

There is only one way I can put this......It's the pinnacle of stupidity to believe that every job available should pay enough for a person to live on.

Lastly, Federal funding comes from Tax Payers. I am aware of this as well. So ... pay them more and they wont "get so much back". Voilà!
Will the states not have a heavy tax since there will be no Fed Gov to help fund things? Or will the mysterious "private organizations" fund everything for their states citizens? Who will fund the "private organizations" I wonder?
And yes, the Government doesn't always budget very well and could use reform, but even that's not good enough of an answer. Why give us the obvious when what we're asking for are solutions?

My god, just pay them more? Are you blonde? Look, I realize that is offensive on many levels but that's all I can do and not get more offensive.

Depth would help.

Across the board cuts and then you have two choices. Do things poorly but do less of it or do the same number of things but so them more efficiently.
 
Ok you seem to like our deficet spending. You miss understood. I said we need to provide state/local with assistance ."Yes, we need disaster assistance to local, county and State level.

So you support continue deficit spending?
I have come to the conclusion some Liberals can't be helped.

No, I support equal responsibility from everyone.
 
If you want Federal Student Loans, cut something else out. How many loans could we make with what the bombs dropped on Libya cost? The arguement is not that these things should not be available, it's that they must somehow be paid for.



Crap on? I've worked those jobs also. There is nothing wrong with these sorts of jobs. The only problem is in thinking one should be able to live off of them. In the end it's also all a viscous circle. Raise the wage to $15.00 an hour, the guy making $15 an hour demands $20 because his standard of living has taken a huge hit and so on to where the person making $15 an hour is in the same position the person making $7.25 is now.



You are running a cash register. A needed job but hardly one that should be anything but what it is.



LOL. I said that there is a place for minimum wage jobs. I was really appreciative for the ones I had. I have no idea where you get condescending.



There is only one way I can put this......It's the pinnacle of stupidity to believe that every job available should pay enough for a person to live on.



My god, just pay them more? Are you blonde? Look, I realize that is offensive on many levels but that's all I can do and not get more offensive.



Across the board cuts and then you have two choices. Do things poorly but do less of it or do the same number of things but so them more efficiently.

:: rolls eyes :: When i said "pay them more" .. "them" means "the workers" .

And whats with the 'You' references? "You're running a register" ... ? You dont know what I do. lol
 
Back
Top Bottom