• 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!

Should Congress Fund Disaster Aid for Northeast

Should Congress Fund Disaster Aid for the Northeast

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 68.4%

  • No

    Votes: 12 31.6%
  • Total voters
    38
  • Poll closed .
Congress should empower the states to take care of their own catastrophes.
 
I would prefer the government fund disaster relief than bail out too big to fail banks.

Some comparisons....

Under Bill Clinton, with a Democrat congress, FEMA was one of the most successful and effective programs in government. When the Northridge Earthquake hit, FEMA was there offering help within days.

Under GWBush, with a Republican congress, FEMA had became a political dumping ground for political hacks and was disfunctional when Katrina hit. If it weren't the media showing all those people stranded for days in the Coloseium and the public outrage, I doubt FEMA would have ever responded at all.

Under Obama, with a Democrat congress, FEMA responded to the Joplin MO tornado victims within a few days.

And now under Obama, with a Republican congress, it's been two months since hurricane Sandy hit and FEMA still hasn't responded. Many towns are still without power and trying clean out the debris.


See a pattern here? Disasters are always going to occur, the question is how effective is the governments response going to be. Because if there ever was a need for government, after a disaster is it.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Oh please. How else do you think the government is going to provide its services to the people that it serves? Conjure things out of thin air? When you learn how the government works and how it is suppose to accomplish what they do then get back to me. Until then I am done with you.
Click to expand...

And yet, you posted 3 more times. If you are going to get emotional, then I am done with you.
 
Kal'Stang said:
The States already have that power. Doesn't mean that the states can always do so though.
Click to expand...
What's keeping some states from "doing so", do you think?
 
Moot said:
I would prefer the government fund disaster relief than bail out too big to fail banks.

Some comparisons....

Under Bill Clinton, with a Democrat congress, FEMA was one of the most successful and effective programs in government. When the Northridge Earthquake hit, FEMA was there offering help within days.

Under GWBush, with a Republican congress, FEMA had became a political dumping ground for political hacks and was disfunctional when Katrina hit. If it weren't the media showing all those people stranded for days in the Coloseium and the public outrage, I doubt FEMA would have ever responded at all.

Under Obama, with a Democrat congress, FEMA responded to the Joplin MO tornado victims within a few days.

And now under Obama, with a Republican congress, it's been two months since hurricane Sandy hit and FEMA still hasn't responded. Many towns are still without power and trying clean out the debris.


See a pattern here? Disasters are always going to occur, the question is how effective is the governments response going to be. Because if there ever was a need for government, after a disaster is it.
Click to expand...

Dooble said:
What's keeping some states from "doing so", do you think?
Click to expand...


See the pattern, some republicans, IMHO, are attempting to thin the herd. They think (I believe) that a person born or in unfortunate circumstances should lift themselves up by their own bootstraps, whether or not they have boots to do so. Many people do so, out of a greater number that don't get the breaks like, mentoring, a stable family life, support systems at pre-K, Kindergarten, Elementary and High school or a Father figure, and religious values.

Sad to say, some of those very same representatives have constituents feeling those circumstances. They are apparently saying they' ll turn their backs on them.
 
Dooble said:
What's keeping some states from "doing so", do you think?
Click to expand...

Probably tons of different things. Non-prepardness, states going broke, politicians that would rather money go into thier pockets than preparing, things like that for the most part imo.
 
No. This is not a proper function of the Federal government.

The REAL question is should everyone else have to pay for the disaster in the Northeast - with the goverment taking a cut for themselves from that money too?

Most people now think government spent money is free. The question, always, is should the government take money from working people against their wishes to give to others?
 
How about the Gov't spending (FEMA) in the Southeast, or South West?
 
amph said:
See the pattern, some republicans, IMHO, are attempting to thin the herd. They think (I believe) that a person born or in unfortunate circumstances should lift themselves up by their own bootstraps, whether or not they have boots to do so. Many people do so, out of a greater number that don't get the breaks like, mentoring, a stable family life, support systems at pre-K, Kindergarten, Elementary and High school or a Father figure, and religious values.

Sad to say, some of those very same representatives have constituents feeling those circumstances. They are apparently saying they' ll turn their backs on them.
Click to expand...
LOL You noticed that too? Privately I think that same exact thing myself all the time.
 
jonny5 said:
Not to mention the federal flood insurance program that many of these home owners bought into cant even afford to pay out. So I guess the govt insurance program needs insurance against itself.
Click to expand...

No I dont think they're entirely guilty, we already pay the money for these programs but in that case they need to be more reliable.
 
I've got to ask the naysayers a question here.

What exactly do you think happens when major natural disasters happen? Do you really think that they just affect the area that the disaster happens in?
 
earthworm said:
When the Constitution was written, NOT ONE WORD as to disasters, one way or the other...
Un-necessary ??
Tell that to the ones who lost everything, including wives and children..
Or do you believe that the Church should handle all of this charity work ??
Click to expand...

Government should not be in the business of charity. As I said before, helping each other is the job of the community.
 
Kal'Stang said:
I've got to ask the naysayers a question here.

What exactly do you think happens when major natural disasters happen? Do you really think that they just affect the area that the disaster happens in?
Click to expand...

That seems similar to the question people ask naysayers on many of these kind of things..

What happens if people don't have food?
What happens if people go without healthcare?
What happens if people are without living wage?
What happens if people don't have a home?
What happens if people don't have an education?
What happens if people don't have a cell phone?
....
....
....
....
continue on until you run out of things one can have..
 
Henrin said:
That seems similar to the question people ask naysayers on many of these kind of things..

What happens if people don't have food?
What happens if people go without healthcare?
What happens if people are without living wage?
What happens if people don't have a home?
What happens if people don't have an education?
What happens if people don't have a cell phone?
....
....
....
....
continue on until you run out of things one can have..
Click to expand...

Nothing more than an evasion. Can't answer the question?
 
Henrin said:
Government should not be in the business of charity. As I said before, helping each other is the job of the community.
Click to expand...

A country is nothing more than one big community. Communities are not just small villiages ya know.
 
Henrin said:
You asked two questions and neither of which deserve an answer.
Click to expand...

So you are purposely ignoring the very reasons that the government has a right, and responsibility to help those that have been in major natural disasters. Gotcha. Why answer a question that would show the truth when you can just dismiss it as "not deserving an answer".
 
Kal'Stang said:
So you are purposely ignoring the very reasons that the government has a right, and responsibility to help those that have been in major natural disasters. Gotcha. Why answer a question that would show the truth when you can just dismiss it as "not deserving an answer".
Click to expand...

The government does not practice rights nor does the government have a responsibility to help people who have been in a major natural disaster.
 
Yes. If we can subsidize and bail out the private sector using taxpayer money, we can at least exercise our responsibility to those taxpayers.
 
Henrin said:
The government does not practice rights nor does the government have a responsibility to help people who have been in a major natural disaster.
Click to expand...

Then answer my question. If you truely believe this then answer my question. What happens when a major natural disaster strikes an area? We'll use Katrina as a base line.
 
jamesrage said:
I believe that any disaster relief should come with strings attached such as making structures resistant to natural disasters or not building in areas below sea level.
Click to expand...

Or in flood plains of major US rivers, or tornado ally or prone to drought hit areas and hence wildfire areas or areas that can be hit by hurricanes. Lets not forget most of the Yellowstone caldera....

So basically most of the red states.. if not the whole US.

Is that what you want?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom