If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   Mitt flips on FEMA as inconvenient timing rears its ugly head. In other news the earth still revolves around the sun and water is still wet   (salon.com) divider line 254
    More: Fail, FEMA, Ryan Grim, Somerset  
•       •       •

8184 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Oct 2012 at 12:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



254 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-30 01:31:30 PM
So he final understands that when shiat hits the fan. It's best to have a scape goat.
Thats about all FEMA is good for.
 
2012-10-30 01:31:59 PM
i449.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-30 01:34:48 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Why do federal dollars need to be doled out?

"To promote the general welfare". It's part of one of our founding documents describing the Fed's responsibilities

It will never be enough
Since it won't be enough, let's just not give any, is that it? Why not give more until it's enough?

and the states have an interest to show that it isn't enough so they will botch the management of their disasters to get more money from the federal government.
Right, local emergency management will screw over themselves and their friends and family just to get more Fed money, rather than use what local and state money the do have effectively.

If the American people want to help these special needs states, they can donate their own money to the cause.
George H. W. Bush's "Thousand points of light" never worked, at least not on the scale of a superstorm like Sandy. Above you said local emergency would fark over everybody, but now you're saying we should rely on peoples' altruism.

If this means people have to move out of hurricane and earthquake zones, tough shiat.
Right, we should depopulate both coasts from Mexico to Canada because they're hurricane and earthquake zones. What about tornado, drought, flood and wildfire zones? What does that leave... the Dakotas?
 
2012-10-30 01:36:34 PM
Mitt is exactly the type of person we need as POTUS.

his commitment to his ideas and beliefs are unsurpassed by any other American.

you will know exactly what his positions are regardless of the situation or calls from the crowds.

He is resolute and let's be honest, he's so good looking!
 
2012-10-30 01:36:45 PM

Skeptos: I'm going to echo what others have said recently: if this slimy, glad-handing bullsh*tter wins the election, the country deserves what it's going to get.


I seriously do not want to live in a country where Romney/Ryan can get elected. Either by fair means or foul.
 
2012-10-30 01:38:11 PM

CeroX: huh... weird, fark stripped my link
here it is: http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/fema.htm



Once again the people who complain most about government are the ones sucking the government's teat the hardest.
 
2012-10-30 01:38:28 PM

CeroX: Headso: Noam Chimpsky: Headso: Vegan Meat Popsicle: Noam Chimpsky: If this means people have to move out of hurricane and earthquake zones, tough shiat.

I always get a kick out of stupid comments like this. Where do you think people are going to go that they aren't going to be subject to the potential for some catastrophic event?

not to mention in these "hurricane zones" they have some of the most fertile soil in all of America.

Good, then they can afford to manage their own disasters. If not, then the benefit side of the ledger doesn't balance out the risk side and they can move or deal with the consequences.

That's just one out of touch derpers opinion. IMO we should support people living in these areas when they are impacted by these storms so they can get back to contributing to the GPD of our nation and growing the foods we all eat.

Looking at the label of all the fruits and veggies i eat, seems most of the food i eat comes from California...
The fish comes from the pacific, so that conceivably comes from CA as well... I have no idea where my beef comes from...

Though i do eat a lot of shrimp... so... i guess we can keep Louisiana...


you're getting your food from an earthquake zone, those farmers should close up operations and move.
 
2012-10-30 01:38:51 PM
Noam Chimpsky may be the dumbest motherfarker I've ever seen parading around as a "smart" person.
 
2012-10-30 01:39:03 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: I really want to vote for Mitt Romney, but since I won't know what his opinions will actually be on election day until election day I haven't actually made up my mind yet.


Maybe we could set up our elected offices with "like" and "dislike" buttons and keep a running tally on everyone. We'd see more flip-flopping than the lake where the dam just burst.
 
2012-10-30 01:40:15 PM

verbaltoxin: Noam Chimpsky: Vegan Meat Popsicle: Noam Chimpsky: If this means people have to move out of hurricane and earthquake zones, tough shiat.

I always get a kick out of stupid comments like this. Where do you think people are going to go that they aren't going to be subject to the potential for some catastrophic event?

Are you claiming that all places have the same potential risk for catastrophic events? The liberal mind is a magical thing.

Are you going to respond to what he said, or what you imagined he said?

/Come to the Midwest!
//No hurricanes, but plenty of droughts, wildfires, floods, blizzards and tornadoes!
///Oh and we're right in Yellowstone's path of destruction if it ever goes off
////Plus we have fault lines too!


If Yellowstone goes off, we won't be financing a rebuild. The fact that disasters can happen everywhere is non sequitur since no one ever claimed they couldn't happen anywhere. If I say an alcoholic with 10 DUI should pay more in auto insurance than a careful driver with no DUI, the fact that "anyone can have a car accident!" would be a liberal and very lame response.
 
2012-10-30 01:41:57 PM
i449.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-30 01:44:11 PM

zarberg: lohphat: If "States' Rights" were really a GOP goal, they'd allow each state to decide on medical pot and marriage freedom...but they don't.

I lean Democrat the vast majority of the time, but the medical pot issue could have easily been solved (albeit temporarily) by Obama by simply telling the right authorities/agencies to not enforce the law in that specific instance. I blame him on this one.


With the GOP legislative presence he doesn't need to give them a reason to tar and feather him as "soft on crime" and "pro drugs".
 
2012-10-30 01:45:28 PM
Ignoring the flip flop for the moment(We focus to much on these, and we forget to look at his actual "policies", at least the ones he has today), the problem with the whole 'Get rid of FEMA' mantra is that no state has consistent disasters. Sure, places like Florida have regular hurricanes, but some do significantly more damage than others. Then you have AZ, which has two FEMA requests, wildfires throughout the summer, and then a 10 year flood cycle. Otherwise, AZ's pretty quiet. The problem is when AZ has two years with flooding and two really big wildfire seasons. Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from? Make it a federal thing, and there's money there. Unless 25states are having disasters at the same exact time, they can get money and resources where they need it. You break it down to the states, and you'll have states with small budgets not recover from a flood ever. An entire city could just be left to rot because the state doesn't have the money.

Disasters are too random to narrow down the recovery funding like that. If Mitt actually listened to financial people, or stopped to think while waiting for the car elevator to bring up his SUV, he'd know this.
 
2012-10-30 01:52:04 PM
Romney hasn't flipped on FEMA (yet). The statement in TFA comes from one of his advisers. Romney himself is talking to the press pool right now, and flat out refusing to answer any questions about whether or not he would eliminate FEMA. https://twitter.com/SabrinaSiddiqui 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/30/mitt-romney-fema_n_2044213.h t ml?1351617484
 
2012-10-30 01:53:37 PM

Noam Chimpsky: If Yellowstone goes off, we won't be financing a rebuild. The fact that disasters can happen everywhere is non sequitur since no one ever claimed they couldn't happen anywhere. If I say an alcoholic with 10 DUI should pay more in auto insurance than a careful driver with no DUI, the fact that "anyone can have a car accident!" would be a liberal and very lame response.


While 9/11-scale terrorist attacks can happen anywhere, they are more likely to happen in places with large concentrations of people, i.e., cities. Why should I, living in a rural area, have my taxes go to fund counter-terrorism operations, post-attack relief and reconstruction, or legal/military action against the perpetrators? Cities can surely afford these things on their own. If not, then cities fail the cost/benefit equation. People who don't like it can move to the country.
 
2012-10-30 01:55:07 PM

Mikey1969: Ignoring the flip flop for the moment(We focus to much on these, and we forget to look at his actual "policies", at least the ones he has today), the problem with the whole 'Get rid of FEMA' mantra is that no state has consistent disasters. Sure, places like Florida have regular hurricanes, but some do significantly more damage than others. Then you have AZ, which has two FEMA requests, wildfires throughout the summer, and then a 10 year flood cycle. Otherwise, AZ's pretty quiet. The problem is when AZ has two years with flooding and two really big wildfire seasons. Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from? Make it a federal thing, and there's money there. Unless 25states are having disasters at the same exact time, they can get money and resources where they need it. You break it down to the states, and you'll have states with small budgets not recover from a flood ever. An entire city could just be left to rot because the state doesn't have the money.

Disasters are too random to narrow down the recovery funding like that. If Mitt actually listened to financial people, or stopped to think while waiting for the car elevator to bring up his SUV, he'd know this.


Shouldn't FEMA be in charge of plowing our roads and bringing food to my house every time it blizzards here in Minnesota? Why should the people of Minnesota have to pay for all that equipment and labor on stand-by for half the year?
 
2012-10-30 01:55:58 PM

Noam Chimpsky: I'm a herpin' and a-derpin'


We get such lame trolls these days. No love of the art.
 
2012-10-30 01:57:48 PM

Mikey1969: Ignoring the flip flop for the moment(We focus to much on these, and we forget to look at his actual "policies", at least the ones he has today), the problem with the whole 'Get rid of FEMA' mantra is that no state has consistent disasters. Sure, places like Florida have regular hurricanes, but some do significantly more damage than others. Then you have AZ, which has two FEMA requests, wildfires throughout the summer, and then a 10 year flood cycle. Otherwise, AZ's pretty quiet. The problem is when AZ has two years with flooding and two really big wildfire seasons. Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from? Make it a federal thing, and there's money there. Unless 25states are having disasters at the same exact time, they can get money and resources where they need it. You break it down to the states, and you'll have states with small budgets not recover from a flood ever. An entire city could just be left to rot because the state doesn't have the money.

Disasters are too random to narrow down the recovery funding like that. If Mitt actually listened to financial people, or stopped to think while waiting for the car elevator to bring up his SUV, he'd know this.


He has to have the votes of the gibberish-spouting-insane-Government-Out-Of-Medicare votes, or he can't win. Talking to smart people doesn't endear you to those "people."
 
2012-10-30 01:58:58 PM

Skeptos: Noam Chimpsky: If Yellowstone goes off, we won't be financing a rebuild. The fact that disasters can happen everywhere is non sequitur since no one ever claimed they couldn't happen anywhere. If I say an alcoholic with 10 DUI should pay more in auto insurance than a careful driver with no DUI, the fact that "anyone can have a car accident!" would be a liberal and very lame response.

While 9/11-scale terrorist attacks can happen anywhere, they are more likely to happen in places with large concentrations of people, i.e., cities. Why should I, living in a rural area, have my taxes go to fund counter-terrorism operations, post-attack relief and reconstruction, or legal/military action against the perpetrators? Cities can surely afford these things on their own. If not, then cities fail the cost/benefit equation. People who don't like it can move to the country.


For the same reasons cities subsidize all the flyover-country roads, bridges, phone service, rail service, bus service, and pretty much everything else?
 
2012-10-30 01:59:26 PM
When Yellowstone goes, at least it will kill all the crappy trolls too.
 
2012-10-30 02:01:44 PM
If you tape the Romney campaign logo onto a weathervane, it will start to spin so fast it will open up a dimensional portal to the Ogdru Jahad.
 
2012-10-30 02:03:55 PM

leviosaurus: Romney hasn't flipped on FEMA (yet). The statement in TFA comes from one of his advisers. Romney himself is talking to the press pool right now, and flat out refusing to answer any questions about whether or not he would eliminate FEMA. https://twitter.com/SabrinaSiddiqui 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/30/mitt-romney-fema_n_2044213.h t ml?1351617484


OVERZEALOUS STAFFER
 
2012-10-30 02:04:18 PM

Noam Chimpsky: If Yellowstone goes off, we won't be financing a rebuild. The fact that disasters can happen everywhere is non sequitur since no one ever claimed they couldn't happen anywhere. If I say an alcoholic with 10 DUI should pay more in auto insurance than a careful driver with no DUI, the fact that "anyone can have a car accident!" would be a liberal and very lame response.


And people who live in flood-prone areas (lower-order floodplains) pay more for flood insurance than those who live outside the 500-year floodplain. This already happens - and actually, the NFIP won't issue you a new policy if your home is in a 100-year floodplain. (Might be a different floodplain, like the 500-year, depending on who's underwriting the policy.)

I'm not a homeowner, but do you pay more to insure a home on the coast than you would to insure an inland home?

I know that people buy earthquake insurance (or is it a rider?) if they live in high-risk areas.

So, do you have any other suggestions for federal agencies that they're already following? I have a great idea for the government to start issuing loans to people with small business ideas...
 
2012-10-30 02:05:55 PM

M-G: Obama campaign needs to hammer VA with ads of Mitt's quote about getting rid of FEMA. Sure, the right-wing pundits will cry foul, but they're going to biatch about whatever he does anyway.


I don't think people want to hear Obama talk about some Sandy Virginia.
 
2012-10-30 02:09:54 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Shouldn't FEMA be in charge of plowing our roads and bringing food to my house every time it blizzards here in Minnesota? Why should the people of Minnesota have to pay for all that equipment and labor on stand-by for half the year?


Because THAT is not a "disaster". That can be planned on for each year. Hell, the states even fark that up and plan it with too slim of a budget, so if it snows too much, they run out of salt. Can you imagine trying to plan ahead for something as variable as "disasters"?

Of course, you didn't want to actually have a discussion, I'm sure. You just wanted to get your "example" out there and try to sabotage me. Not the best I've seen on fark. Too weak of an argument, too obvious, and too off the point. I guess you deserve about a 3/10.
 
2012-10-30 02:09:59 PM

bdub77: People don't understand, funding FEMA is immoral! It's immoral! See we should let the state's decide how to do it, that way it's not immoral.

You see how that works?

Federal Emergency Management Agency = immoral
State Emergency Management Agency = moral

See, states can do everything. They are magical AND moral. Except invading Iran. Then we will ask states to send their people to other countries to die for us. Which is absolutely the moral thing to do.

That's what people just don't understand in America. We are America! We live in a country that is made up of tiny countries! A union of tiny countries into one country that's the same country! It's brilliant, really. And we don't have to help each other out except to attack other countries. I mean sure, we mostly all speak the same language. And sure, we have the same currency. And our businesses are intertwined all over the country. And our systems of roads, bridges, and waterways span across different states, sure. Oh and people can move between countries and often do a lot. But we should let states each invent totally different rules so that we're confused by each state's rules and therefore we no longer function as a country but a set of independent countries where rape babies are OK in some places. That's how it works, people! America! Freedom! Eagles! Rape Babies!


This is why you're my favoritest favorite.
 
2012-10-30 02:12:44 PM

verbaltoxin: Noam Chimpsky: Vegan Meat Popsicle: Noam Chimpsky: If this means people have to move out of hurricane and earthquake zones, tough shiat.

I always get a kick out of stupid comments like this. Where do you think people are going to go that they aren't going to be subject to the potential for some catastrophic event?

Are you claiming that all places have the same potential risk for catastrophic events? The liberal mind is a magical thing.

Are you going to respond to what he said, or what you imagined he said?

/Come to the Midwest!
//No hurricanes, but plenty of droughts, wildfires, floods, blizzards and tornadoes!
///Oh and we're right in Yellowstone's path of destruction if it ever goes off
////Plus we have fault lines too!


To be fair, pretty much all of North America is in Yelowstone's path of destruction. When that goes, it's going to have a global impact, but it's gonna flatten a good 2/3 of the US.

As for the rest of your post, Noam Chimpsky has no idea what end is up, let alone how disasters work.
 
2012-10-30 02:12:52 PM
bmadore.squarespace.com

Just keep talking, Mitt. That'll work.
 
2012-10-30 02:15:21 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Stile4aly: In the event of a Hurricane, Mitt Romney will be sure to see which way the wind is blowing.

The fact that it's usually blowing in all directions will suit him nicely then.

 
2012-10-30 02:24:40 PM

Dr Dreidel: I have a great idea for the government to start issuing loans to people with small business ideas...


That sounds kind of Sochulist. If somebody is supposed to be a business owner, they'd be rich enough to not need a loan, but they'd still get one at low interest from a banking buddy. Geez, don't you know nuthin bout finance?
 
2012-10-30 02:39:24 PM

Aquapope: Dr Dreidel: I have a great idea for the government to start issuing loans to people with small business ideas...

That sounds kind of Sochulist. If somebody is supposed to be a business owner, they'd be rich enough to not need a loan, but they'd still get one at low interest from a banking buddy. Geez, don't you know nuthin bout finance?


no no no no.... if you need money for anything, houes, car, small business, college etc. you borrow the money from you parents but that's only if you've exhausted your ROI.
 
2012-10-30 02:47:06 PM

Aquapope: Dr Dreidel: I have a great idea for the government to start issuing loans to people with small business ideas...

That sounds kind of Sochulist. If somebody is supposed to be a business owner, they'd be rich enough to not need a loan, but they'd still get one at low interest from a banking buddy. Geez, don't you know nuthin bout finance?


The bank will lend you money for your business idea if it looks like they will make a profit. If the government is handing out money for business ideas with no regard to its viability, like Solyndra, etc., then the country goes bankrupt and that doesn't benefit anyone. If they do consider the viability of your venture, then they are not needed because that is what banks are for. If you haven't worked for a while and accumulated some collateral and a worthy credit rating, then you probably aren't ready to run a business.
 
2012-10-30 02:54:07 PM
The original over (or under) zealous staffer -

"One thing he's gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly"

- Michael "Brownie" Brown
 
2012-10-30 03:04:45 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Aquapope: Dr Dreidel: I have a great idea for the government to start issuing loans to people with small business ideas...

That sounds kind of Sochulist. If somebody is supposed to be a business owner, they'd be rich enough to not need a loan, but they'd still get one at low interest from a banking buddy. Geez, don't you know nuthin bout finance?

The bank will lend you money for your business idea if it looks like they will make a profit. If the government is handing out money for business ideas with no regard to its viability, like Solyndra, etc., then the country goes bankrupt and that doesn't benefit anyone. If they do consider the viability of your venture, then they are not needed because that is what banks are for. If you haven't worked for a while and accumulated some collateral and a worthy credit rating, then you probably aren't ready to run a business.


The government hands out SBA loans and loan guarantees to the tune of tens of billions a year. This is separate from tax credits, grants and tax breaks given to companies like ExxonMobil, BP, BoA, MorganStanleySmithBarneyFrankConnorRickBobJonesSteveEllen, Pfizer, GE, and any number of companies both big and small.

SBA's 8a program, for example, gives loans and other support for small, disadvantaged, and woman-owned businesses (my former employer, a super-biatch from the depths of hell, is about to let her first company go bankrupt so that she can start a new one - with her name not uttered to the many clients with whom she has burned bridges* - to take advantage of the 8a designation since the first company is both too big, and now, to tarred-with-her-reputation). The 8a designation puts companies in prime place for government contracts. Same deal with Native American-owned businesses.

They still examine your plan for viability, but as we all know from before we took ECON101 - investment carries risk. Even when it's the FedGov doing the lending, and even when they have 60+ years of their own lending data to help them determine who gets loans. They don't just hand every Sally Sobstory a huge check to start "hugabunny.com" (where you can click to send a virtual "hug" to Sally's pet rabbit, Mr. Cheesy) - there's an involved application/approval process.

But I've gotten sidetracked. You were supposed to suggest other things for FEMA to do that they're already doing.

*She once floated the idea of suing CBP - Customs and Border Protection - and wanted the IT department to secretly record several meetings with CBP people.
 
Bf+
2012-10-30 03:15:54 PM
no no no I never said I'd eliminate FEMA. The states currently getting funds will see no change in their program.
The other states will be given vouchers for disaster relief, and they can go shopping to find the best disaster relief provider that's right for them!
 
2012-10-30 03:15:59 PM

Mikey1969: Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from?


Where did the money that would have paid for them federally go?
 
2012-10-30 03:25:36 PM

trappedspirit: Mikey1969: Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from?

Where did the money that would have paid for them federally go?


It goes into a pool. One year Florida might take more from that pool, another year New York. Another time it might be Arizona. That's how it works, otherwise we wouldn't even need states or counties. Hell, why don't we do it all at the city level? Better yet, let's knock it down to streets. If the folks over on Jackson street can't afford to pay the plow drivers, why should we?

Your anti-fed argument can just as easily be applied to anti-state, anti-county or anti-city, it won't make any less sense than it already does.
 
2012-10-30 03:30:41 PM

GardenWeasel: Cletus C.: Has Obama declared this an act of nature yet?

Or is he blaming it on some incendiary hurricane-chasing youtube video?

Last I heard, Obama was blaming the gales of butthurt coming from your ass.


I don't know why, but this just caused me to laugh out loud at my desk for 5 minutes. Thank you. Thank you so much.
 
2012-10-30 03:32:03 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: I really want to vote for Mitt Romney,


This is the first time I've seen these words together. Fascinating.
 
2012-10-30 03:34:47 PM
Dr Dreidel:

SBA's 8a program, for example, gives loans and other support for small, disadvantagedi>

I don't want to finance the ventures of someone who fits the definition of a nonsense word like "disadvantaged". It sounds like a losing proposition. You, on the other hand, are free to finance the ventures of this so-called "disadvantaged" person with your own wallet. Since you are a big believer in its potential, I'm sure it will benefit you greatly, and I'll be very happy for you and disadvantaged when the profits start rolling in.
 
2012-10-30 03:35:54 PM
Oh, scuse my boldness.
 
2012-10-30 03:40:30 PM

leviosaurus: Romney hasn't flipped on FEMA (yet). The statement in TFA comes from one of his advisers. Romney himself is talking to the press pool right now, and flat out refusing to answer any questions about whether or not he would eliminate FEMA. https://twitter.com/SabrinaSiddiqui 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/30/mitt-romney-fema_n_2044213.h t ml?1351617484


For a politician, he sure doesn't seem to like to discuss politics much.
 
2012-10-30 03:55:02 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Dr Dreidel:

SBA's 8a program, for example, gives loans and other support for small, disadvantaged

I don't want to finance the ventures of someone who fits the definition of a nonsense word like "disadvantaged". It sounds like a losing proposition. You, on the other hand, are free to finance the ventures of this so-called "disadvantaged" person with your own wallet. Since you are a big believer in its potential, I'm sure it will benefit you greatly, and I'll be very happy for you and disadvantaged when the profits start rolling in.


Also not the point.

You were supposed to come back with a list of things you want the government to do that they're already doing. I helpfully offered loans and loan guarantees to "small" businesses (including 8(a)s) to get you started. (Because making loans to help businesses get off the ground - without usurious fees or rates - is a good thing, and I'm all for the government getting involved. Show me the loan failure rates if you think it's a bad idea.)

// and "disadvantaged", IIRC, just means "not owned by a rich white man"
// meaning it's a small business (<$8m in revenue IIRC), not owned by a man or owned by a minority
// though I think there's a separate designation for "black-owned businesses" (or maybe it's just a subset?)
// but again, this was about how FEMA already does the things you want them to do, so SBA don't enter into it
 
Bf+
2012-10-30 03:58:13 PM

Noam Chimpsky: Dr Dreidel:

SBA's 8a program, for example, gives loans and other support for small, disadvantagedi>

I don't want to finance the ventures of someone who fits the definition of a nonsense word like "disadvantaged". It sounds like a losing proposition. You, on the other hand, are free to finance the ventures of this so-called "disadvantaged" person with your own wallet. Since you are a big believer in its potential, I'm sure it will benefit you greatly, and I'll be very happy for you and disadvantaged when the profits start rolling in.



That's a bold statement.
 
2012-10-30 04:32:50 PM

Mikey1969: trappedspirit: Mikey1969: Suddenly they've gone through 8 or 10 years' worth of disasters in two. Where does the extra money come from?

Where did the money that would have paid for them federally go?

It goes into a pool. One year Florida might take more from that pool, another year New York. Another time it might be Arizona. That's how it works, otherwise we wouldn't even need states or counties. Hell, why don't we do it all at the city level? Better yet, let's knock it down to streets. If the folks over on Jackson street can't afford to pay the plow drivers, why should we?

Your anti-fed argument can just as easily be applied to anti-state, anti-county or anti-city, it won't make any less sense than it already does.


Well, I do agree that dividing this problem down to an absurd level does nothing to forward the point, and I do think improving the certain states' emergency response readiness is a good idea. Perhaps allowing states with special needs that feel they want more local readiness than FEMA has provided to not contribute as much to the fed but use that for additional resources. As far as I am concerned FEMA just has the spotlight for the moment and isn't one of the big problems with this candidacy.
 
2012-10-30 04:42:18 PM
img255.imageshack.us
 
2012-10-30 04:44:26 PM

mark12A: Big organizations are inherently dangerous,

Who certifies the quality and strength of materials and fasteners that hold virtually everything together? A private organization called ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials)

Why can't the functions of the FDA be provided by a similar organization? Who pioneered consumer safety? Not the government. Underwriters Labs (UL) did. Yeah, the little UL tag on your toaster cord.

We don't NEED the Consumer Product Safety Commission. It's a government boondoggle.


ASTM members = ~30,000
UL employees = ~10,000
CPSC employees = ~500
 
2012-10-30 07:31:27 PM
There is at least one huge problem with devolving emergency response to the states:

Many of them must legally balance their budgets each year. They cannot deficit spend to recover from disasters. The federal government does that.

Also, states are not required to ask for federal assistance. They can try and handle it on their own if they want to.
 
2012-10-30 10:05:35 PM

JAYoung: Since Obama still believes in responsible, effective government, when he needed an expert to run FEMA he called on Jeb Bush's hurricane expert, Craig Fugate.
Hell of a job, Craigie.
Sure beats a horsey guy political hack.


Makes sense, Florida knows its hurricanes. Although I suppose there was the risk of him assuming everyone else does.

From what I've heard that was ironically Micheal Brown's problem. There had been a Florida hurricane and summary FEMA response but for everyone involved it "wasn't their first rodeo" so they didn't need any command decisions, just to follow the already-laid-out patterns and scripts. Then New Orleans did NOT have that kind of organization and everybody in command central was too incompetent to give any guidance.
 
2012-10-30 10:43:22 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Noam Chimpsky: Good, then they can afford to manage their own disasters. If not, then the benefit side of the ledger doesn't balance out the risk side and they can move or deal with the consequences.

[www.ncdc.noaa.gov image 850x574]

Wyoming, Michigan, Vermont, Massachusettes, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine, Hawaii and Alaska. Everybody pile in!

/ and I'm sure once that happens those states won't wind up being the most expensive disaster areas


With the obvious exception of the current hurricane, that graphic seems to show that Romney's original stance (dismantle FEMA) would likely have the most long-term adverse impact on states that support Romney.
 
Displayed 50 of 254 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report