• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

FEMA

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser34

I know what FEMA is and I know what it has done. It has been a huge failure and has spent countless amounts of money being the failure that they are, that could have been left with the states (not extracted by the federal government) so that they could handle their own emergencies.

If you are arguing that FEMA has been a good steward of the money they have been given, then apparently it is you who needs to do some research.

Contrary to the government indoctrination that so many have been given, we actually can get along without having the federal government take over everything under the sun. That is not the form of government we were given and it most certainly is not the best use of resources. Or, have you forgotten the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on trailers that were junked because they did not meet "FEMA standards", or the checks doled out after Katrina to people who didn't even live there.

Simply said, FEMA hinders recovery. They come in and tell residents what they can and cannot do, won't allow you in your houses and hinder the local people and even volunteers from going in.

It needs to be abolished and the money that funded it should stay in the pockets of the taxpayers.
hmmmm, it isn't feasible to say FEMA should be scrapped and the money stay with tax payers. I agree it has its bureaucratic issues, but it is a necessary evil. I look at FEMA very similar to how I view welfare. It should be scrapped, BUT,but there has to be something in its place. I agree it needs to be improved, fixed, redone, however you care to categorize it.

I personally think states should have the say so in how it is spent. I do agree that states have more input now than they did during Katrina, but, I think states should have ALL say so in how it is spent and where the money goes. However, funding is an issue, so the federal government will always need to have a role.

To say to kill it blindly with no alternative is ridiculous The difference between FEMA and welfare is disaster doesn't rely on laziness or hard work, it just happens much like life.
 

DeletedUser3

I know what FEMA is and I know what it has done. It has been a huge failure and has spent countless amounts of money being the failure that they are, that could have been left with the states (not extracted by the federal government) so that they could handle their own emergencies.
Prior to 1993, FEMA was a marginally successful contributor to disaster relief. During Clinton's administration, FEMA was instrumental in many areas, firmly demonstrating that FEMA, managed with the right hands and with the right "support" objectives, is not only effective, but essential. This was demonstrated time and time again from 1994 to 2000.

The problem arose when the Bush administration stepped in and, literally, tore down FEMA and made it a "department" within Bush' Homeland Security. Not only was the nation's fire & rescue now being managed by the nations police department, it was managed in a similar fashion... that of dictating instead of supporting.

Please review the facts in this case, as the presumptions are intruding upon history.
 

Liberty

Active Member
Please review the facts in this case, as the presumptions are intruding upon history.

No, they aren't, Hellstromm. You just don't agree. It is as simple as that.

Ah, FEMA... what a success it is. :)
http://www.app.com/viewart/20121109/NJNEWS/311090027/Oceanport-sandy-shelter

- - - Updated - - -

hmmmm, it isn't feasible to say FEMA should be scrapped and the money stay with tax payers. I agree it has its bureaucratic issues, but it is a necessary evil. I look at FEMA very similar to how I view welfare. It should be scrapped, BUT,but there has to be something in its place. I agree it needs to be improved, fixed, redone, however you care to categorize it.

I personally think states should have the say so in how it is spent. I do agree that states have more input now than they did during Katrina, but, I think states should have ALL say so in how it is spent and where the money goes. However, funding is an issue, so the federal government will always need to have a role.

To say to kill it blindly with no alternative is ridiculous The difference between FEMA and welfare is disaster doesn't rely on laziness or hard work, it just happens much like life.

What are you talking about? How do you think disasters were taken care of before FEMA?

Do you also think that if the Department of Education was abolished, that there wouldn't be anymore public education? Geez, I think I'm showing my age. Because I remember a time back when there was no DOE and amazingly enough our test scores were the very best in the world.
 

DeletedUser34

Well for starters, FEMA was signed by Carter in what? 79? So I'd say it has been around for pretty well a quarter of a century?
DOE? It has been around forever, maybe under different names, but still around....

And if you think the government didn't come in and help out those effected by Black Sunday, you are crazy. Maybe not under a defined department, but disaster assistance has been around for even longer than you were an itch in someone drawers. I don't really care HOW old you are.

Oh and lets take off the blinders about education in the time and area of the country during prospecting times. Many children, MOST children didn't get an education, so try again.
 

DeletedUser

No, they aren't, Hellstromm. You just don't agree. It is as simple as that.

Ah, FEMA... what a success it is. :)
http://www.app.com/viewart/20121109/NJNEWS/311090027/Oceanport-sandy-shelter

That's truly sad. It really is and I empathize with him and his family. A disaster hit and destroyed homes and lives in a matter of hours. I'm sure he and other like him are devastated. I've read several stories of good, bad and the ugly, but the bottom line is that this is a disaster.

It's very easy to sit in your warm house and search the internet for sad and horrible stories as it is to find good ones. What you're not reading or understanding or acknowledging are the thousands of workers, volunteers and agencies that are trying to piece back together what a disaster ripped like a shredder. A storm tore through towns and erased what man had taken years to build in a matter of hours. The electrician who's on the pole in the cold, wet weather piecing together PCC090X power-line (Did that for 6 years while going to college) has cold winds ripping his face off, at least that what it feels like. You can't feel your hands even though you're hands are in insulated gloves. The work is slow and tedious, but you have to keep working. 14 hour shifts in remote areas where you know if you get hurt chances are you're S.O.L. Oh yeah, it's like that and much more.

So while I empathize with this guy and understand how defeated he feels, I also understand what those workers are desperately trying to rebuild what has taken years. I also know that some people are going to have it tougher then others and some may even fall through the cracks. The work still has to be done. The people who do it are suffering, but they march forward, cussing the weather, wind, rain, that (Expletive Here) bucket you're in that keeps moving while you're splicing.

So before you call FEMA and the people who work for it a failure, perhaps you should do some of the work. Look at these people in the eye and try to explain you're working as fast as you and your crew can. Sleep in the same shelters as they do and eat and drink the same provisions. That's life in a disaster. No one is involved is happy. No one is comfortable. And most of all, none of them are Failures!
 

Liberty

Active Member
This should say volumes to people who believe in FEMA. lol

image640x480.jpg


Link
 

Liberty

Active Member
Well for starters, FEMA was signed by Carter in what? 79? So I'd say it has been around for pretty well a quarter of a century?
DOE? It has been around forever, maybe under different names, but still around....

And if you think the government didn't come in and help out those effected by Black Sunday, you are crazy. Maybe not under a defined department, but disaster assistance has been around for even longer than you were an itch in someone drawers. I don't really care HOW old you are.

Oh and lets take off the blinders about education in the time and area of the country during prospecting times. Many children, MOST children didn't get an education, so try again.

Wow. Check your facts. Scores have plummeted since the DOE was established. Believe it or not, states and local communities are perfectly able to handle education. It is the DOE that forces things like the UN's failed No Child Left Behind on schools.

As far as disasters go, they have been dealt with by states, local communities, and volunteers from other states and if deemed necessary, the federal government passed a one-time bill to provide monetary support.

Why is it that you believe that the federal government needs to intercede in everything? From what you have posted, you seem to be a Republican. You should know that is not the form of government our Founders designed.
 

DeletedUser34

Wow. Check your facts. Scores have plummeted since the DOE was established. Believe it or not, states and local communities are perfectly able to handle education. It is the DOE that forces things like the UN's failed No Child Left Behind on schools.
Don't wow me. My facts are accurate to the points you made prior to this unrelated point. But since you bring it up, by all means, lets dance.
Prior to the DOE there was what was called the "Office of Education" This office simply rolled over into the Department of Education. Now, lets discuss your bull claim that the DOE is the reason for falling test scores. Let us look at the society of today, and see if maybe THAT plays a role in these falling test scores.

  • Back in the day the teachers could spank students and parents were kept out of the education process, and disruptive children were not around in class to disrupt the flow
  • Back then there were less mandates passed BY CONGRESS, requiring schools to take money out of the education budget, and put into administrative budgets.
  • Back education was a priority, it was a goal...now it is simply a cluster of kids whose parents think the school is a babysitting program.

Now, don't talk to me about No child left behind. I am still paying off the expense I had to pay to get my daughter graduated, because the schools epically failed her. Now, you wanna know WHY? Disruptive students were required to be left in the class, ESPECIALLY if they were of a minority. Thus, my daughter's class was two thirds spent with the teacher having to deal with problems rather than teach how to over come her own specific disabilities.

The problem isn't the DOE, it is societies warped view of who should have a say so in how children are taught. Heaven forbid we kick a trouble maker out of the system.

As far as disasters go, they have been dealt with by states, local communities, and volunteers from other states and if deemed necessary, the federal government passed a one-time bill to provide monetary support.
Your logic is flawed. Disasters generally do not limit themselves to one region/state. Since states do not have the power to raise money the way the federal government does, to expect them to fund utter devastation would put us in the same situation that Haiti is STILL facing. I think you better double check your facts here and offer some back up, because states have never EVER been able to foot the bill of such magnitude alone. oh did I say FOREVER?

Why is it that you believe that the federal government needs to intercede in everything? From what you have posted, you seem to be a Republican. You should know that is not the form of government our Founders designed.
This will cause me some grief, I am sure.....But learn to read. I do not believe in a large federal government, I am totally against it...something I have posted many times over and over in this venue. I am a very conservative Republican, almost annoyingly so....FISCALLY. I am more centered on social issues than most people here. That being said, I realize this isn't the same government of our forefathers...only and idiot would imagine it is..and I may be uneducated, and snarky, and moody, but I am not an idiot. However, for someone to think that the federal government doesn't play a role in the nations infrastructure, including but not limiting to the well being of the nation is delusional. You also need to RE READ my post about FEMA, and welfare......once you do...you may apologize.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Liberty

Active Member
Don't wow me. My facts are accurate to the points you made prior to this unrelated point. But since you bring it up, by all means, lets dance.
Prior to the DOE there was what was called the "Office of Education" This office simply rolled over into the Department of Education. Now, lets discuss your bull claim that the DOE is the reason for falling test scores. Let us look at the society of today, and see if maybe THAT plays a role in these falling test scores.

  • Back in the day the teachers could spank students and parents were kept out of the education process, and disruptive children were not around in class to disrupt the flow
  • Back then there were less mandates passed BY CONGRESS, requiring schools to take money out of the education budget, and put into administrative budgets.
  • Back education was a priority, it was a goal...now it is simply a cluster of kids whose parents think the school is a babysitting program.

Now, don't talk to me about No child left behind. I am still paying off the expense I had to pay to get my daughter graduated, because the schools epically failed her. Now, you wanna know WHY? Disruptive students were required to be left in the class, ESPECIALLY if they were of a minority. Thus, my daughter's class was two thirds spent with the teacher having to deal with problems rather than teach how to over come her own specific disabilities.

The problem isn't the DOE, it is societies warped view of who should have a say so in how children are taught. Heaven forbid we kick a trouble maker out of the system.
I agree with a lot of what you said. The problem is that you don't seem to understand the role that the DOE played in achieving this.

Your logic is flawed. Disasters generally do not limit themselves to one region/state. Since states do not have the power to raise money the way the federal government does, to expect them to fund utter devastation would put us in the same situation that Haiti is STILL facing. I think you better double check your facts here and offer some back up, because states have never EVER been able to foot the bill of such magnitude alone. oh did I say FOREVER?

States most certainly did fit the bill for most emergencies, but then they didn't used to be fleeced to fund the megalith of FEMA, either. I also said that IF an emergency was of unspeakable magnitude, that the way it used to be handled was the Congress passed a one-time aid bill. What about that do you think is unworkable?

This will cause me some grief, I am sure.....But learn to read. I do not believe in a large federal government, I am totally against it...something I have posted many times over and over in this venue. I am a very conservative Republican, almost annoyingly so....FISCALLY. I am more centered on social issues than most people here. That being said, I realize this isn't the same government of our forefathers...only and idiot would imagine it is..and I may be uneducated, and snarky, and moody, but I am not an idiot. However, for someone to think that the federal government doesn't play a role in the nations infrastructure, including but not limiting to the well being of the nation is delusional. You also need to RE READ my post about FEMA, and welfare......once you do...you may apologize.

You may think you don't support having a large government, but you really do. You clamor for federal government control over education and don't believe that states can handle their own emergencies, with help from neighbor states, if needed. By your own words, you don't hold the Constitution in high regard; apparently, not understanding that the very principles that are embeded in that document are just as applicable today as they were when it was written. They are the principles of freedom and the fact that we have allowed our government to run astray of it is largely why our government is so messed up today.

You aren't a conservative if you do not believe in a limited constitutional government.
 

DeletedUser34

Here is the problem with your logic.
FEMA has been around since 1979, if you are saying otherwise, I'd suggest you provide a link with back up.
Secondly, having lived through Andrew, with a minimal version of FEMA, we Floridians have become so adapt at dealing with disasters, that we generally just roll with it. Florida asked the Government for money post Andrew to help rebuild. We were not able to subsidize such massive rebuilding on our own. You can thank Andrew for FEMA becoming as big as it is.

Back in the days you want to revert to, most communities were self sustaining. If something needed fixing you were able to find the resources locally. Today, we have a few factors that make your idea absolutely illogical. Firstly, communities are integrated, and specialized. Secondly, the ease in which people and product move from state to state has made each state more singular in its various outputs. And Finally, people today are more in the habit of not taking care of themselves and would rather do what they want and let others help bail them out. Not many people have contingency plans anymore.

If Florida were to have another Andrew, they do not have the resources that would be needed to rebuild. They don't have the right, nor the resources to demand Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana help them out, and odds are those areas will be effected as well. This is where the federal government comes into play. They are the only ones who are able to motivate the other states to participate to the extent needed. The truth is with the world today, there HAS to be a centrally funded disaster fund. That is where the federal Govenrment comes in. I happen to agree with you that FEMA is a waste of money and needs canned.

However, you stated that tax payers need to keep the money, and that is unrealistic. It would have to come from somewhere, no matter where the taxes go. THAT was my sole point. I agree get rid of it, but it is unrealistic to expect nothing to replace it. You are asking America to go back to the pre depression days, and we saw how well capitalism without some safeguards worked out.

Secondly, because we have such an "entitled" society, people will not take care of themselves. We created this lazy society, we are responsible to a point to maintain them. In Florida, you hear a hurricane is coming....ask any floridian what we do. If we are inland, you go buy beer, charcoal, FEMA blue tarps, batteries, candles, and gas. Why? Because we party. We don't expect the government to bail us out. Storm blows over, each house takes its turn to help the neighborhood. I actually have a video of me and my family and it is looking out at the first bands of I believe it was Wilma, and you hear me ask my cousin what we do right before a hurricane....She laughs and says on camera to turn around....I do, and state, WE GO TO DISNEY WORLD, as the train depot comes into view..... BUT, the idiots who don't prepare, well, you know, they are part of our society, and therefore our responsibility.

Now as to my politics....I am a conservative Republican. I do believe in limited government...however, I respect the fact that government is needed. We are to integrated at this point to be able to function solo. You don't see a foot functioning well without an ankle do you? The forefathers made our constitution as vague as possible because they are forward thinkers. They knew the Republic of then would not be the Republic of the future. Now if you look at the States constitution, they are by far more specific. I am not a believer in chopping off my nose to spite my face, and if we were to kick FEMA to the curb, no replacement pending, we as a country are shortsighted morons.

If you wish to carry on this discussion about Dept. of Education, be my guest...but do so on a new thread. And produce back up for your wild claims....otherwise....can it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser3

If you wish to carry on this discussion about Dept. of Education, be my guest...but do so on a new thread. And produce back up for your wild claims....otherwise....can it.
Yep agreed, the topic of this thread is FEMA. For continued debates on DoE, I request a copy/paste of the discussions here that refer to DoE and creating a new thread.

Thanks all. Great debates and plenty of spirit being presented. Let's stay on topic. Carry on. :)
 

Liberty

Active Member
Here is the problem with your logic.
FEMA has been around since 1979, if you are saying otherwise, I'd suggest you provide a link with back up.
What does the length of time it has been around have to do with anything?

Secondly, having lived through Andrew, with a minimal version of FEMA, we Floridians have become so adapt at dealing with disasters, that we generally just roll with it. Florida asked the Government for money post Andrew to help rebuild. We were not able to subsidize such massive rebuilding on our own. You can thank Andrew for FEMA becoming as big as it is.
As I said before a couple of times, Congress can always pass a one-time aid bill to assist if it is absolutely necessary. FEMA is not needed in order to do that.

Back in the days you want to revert to, most communities were self sustaining. If something needed fixing you were able to find the resources locally. Today, we have a few factors that make your idea absolutely illogical. Firstly, communities are integrated, and specialized. Secondly, the ease in which people and product move from state to state has made each state more singular in its various outputs. And Finally, people today are more in the habit of not taking care of themselves and would rather do what they want and let others help bail them out. Not many people have contingency plans anymore.
This is the problem and they got that way, because the federal government became their nanny. It has made our country weak; not to mention the people. They no longer believe they can do anything without government telling them when and how to do it. Our country will not survive if this mindset continues.

If Florida were to have another Andrew, they do not have the resources that would be needed to rebuild. They don't have the right, nor the resources to demand Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana help them out, and odds are those areas will be effected as well. This is where the federal government comes into play. They are the only ones who are able to motivate the other states to participate to the extent needed. The truth is with the world today, there HAS to be a centrally funded disaster fund. That is where the federal Govenrment comes in. I happen to agree with you that FEMA is a waste of money and needs canned.
What do you mean, "demand"? Hell no, no one has the right to demand anything at all from the pockets of another person, and you don't have the right to do it, even if you think you do by utilizing government to steal for you what you wish them to steal.

That said, we have never had an emergency when Americans from all over the country have not pitched in by droves. Yet, you want the nanny state and you got it.

However, you stated that tax payers need to keep the money, and that is unrealistic. It would have to come from somewhere, no matter where the taxes go. THAT was my sole point. I agree get rid of it, but it is unrealistic to expect nothing to replace it. You are asking America to go back to the pre depression days, and we saw how well capitalism without some safeguards worked out.
FEMA was established in 1979. The Great Depression was quite a bit before that. lol. But, it's nice to know you're all for big government force though. A conservative, you ain't.

Secondly, because we have such an "entitled" society, people will not take care of themselves. We created this lazy society, we are responsible to a point to maintain them.
Do you realize how ridiculous what you said, sounds? Beyond the nanny state mentality that you promote, there are other governments besides the federal government. As far as people are concerned, I have more faith in them than you do, apparently.

In Florida, you hear a hurricane is coming....ask any floridian what we do. If we are inland, you go buy beer, charcoal, FEMA blue tarps, batteries, candles, and gas. Why? Because we party. We don't expect the government to bail us out. Storm blows over, each house takes its turn to help the neighborhood. I actually have a video of me and my family and it is looking out at the first bands of I believe it was Wilma, and you hear me ask my cousin what we do right before a hurricane....She laughs and says on camera to turn around....I do, and state, WE GO TO DISNEY WORLD, as the train depot comes into view..... BUT, the idiots who don't prepare, well, you know, they are part of our society, and therefore our responsibility.
Again, there are state and local governments, but you know, if people realize they cannot count on big brother to come bail them out, they will quickly learn to stand on their own two feet.

Now as to my politics....I am a conservative Republican.
No, you aren't. You argue for the nanny state. There isn't a thing conservative about that.

I do believe in limited government...however, I respect the fact that government is needed. We are to integrated at this point to be able to function solo. You don't see a foot functioning well without an ankle do you? The forefathers made our constitution as vague as possible because they are forward thinkers. They knew the Republic of then would not be the Republic of the future. Now if you look at the States constitution, they are by far more specific.
The principles they laid out in that document haven't changed one iota; neither have the enumerated powers. If you are unclear what they meant on any part of the Constitution, just read the Federalist Papers.

I am not a believer in chopping off my nose to spite my face, and if we were to kick FEMA to the curb, no replacement pending, we as a country are shortsighted morons.
There is a replacement. You just have become conditioned to the federal government doing everything.

If you wish to carry on this discussion about Dept. of Education, be my guest...but do so on a new thread. And produce back up for your wild claims....otherwise....can it.
What are you talking about? Do you need a copy of the Constitution, or something? Or a list of the failures of FEMA?

Since when is it "wild" to believe that states should take care of disasters in their own states, with help from their neighbors. And if it is a horrendous disaster, that the Congress pass a one-time aid bill to help?

The little experiment that our Founders gave us of liberty is coming to a close and sooner than I think a lot of people even realize.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

As I said before a couple of times, Congress can always pass a one-time aid bill to assist if it is absolutely necessary. FEMA is not needed in order to do that.
Liberty, you know better then that. Congress passing an emergency bill? The reason that FEMA was organized so that they can be dispatched with funds at a moments notice. Congress takes days to unzip their pants let alone pass anything in time to help.

This is the problem and they got that way, because the federal government became their nanny. It has made our country weak; not to mention the people. They no longer believe they can do anything without government telling them when and how to do it. Our country will not survive if this mindset continues.

This statement has no fact behind it and it's a bit naive. Small communities can not possibly have the specialists on hand. The fact you seem to be forgetting is that a disaster hits multiple cities and towns. The specialists that are used to rebuild are not just from the state but are brought in by FEMA from all over the U.S.

That said, we have never had an emergency when Americans from all over the country have not pitched in by droves. Yet, you want the nanny state and you got it.

*COUGH *COUGH FEMA *COUGH *COUGH. I love it when the point comes back to the very thing they argue against. Liberty, I appreciate your arguments, but it seems your knowledge on FEMA is extremely limited. FEMA is not an army of people who sit around waiting for an emergency. FEMA organizes people to come together from other states as well as local services. They have the funds to get these people and equipment to the disaster site in the quickest possible way, usually through the military. They have the Federal authority that allows them to use the highways and airways in order to get to those devastated areas quickly. The resources and authority alone make them invaluable.

In lui Your points have no basis when you can't come up with an argument that out weighs the good they do. Unfortunately there's nothing better out their because if there were they'd be using it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Liberty, you know better then that. Congress passing an emergency bill? The reason that FEMA was organized so that they can be dispatched with funds at a moments notice. Congress takes days to unzip their pants let alone pass anything in time to help.

This statement has no fact behind it and it's a bit naive. Small communities can not possibly have the specialists on hand. The fact you seem to be forgetting is that a disaster hits multiple cities and towns. The specialists that are used to rebuild are not just from the state but are brought in by FEMA from all over the U.S.
All true.

*COUGH *COUGH FEMA *COUGH *COUGH. I love it when the point comes back to the very thing they argue against. Liberty, I appreciate your arguments, but it seems your knowledge on FEMA is extremely limited. FEMA is not an army of people who sit around waiting for an emergency. FEMA organizes people to come together from other states as well as local services. They have the funds to get these people and equipment to the disaster site in the quickest possible way, usually through the military. They have the Federal authority that allows them to use the highways and airways in order to get to those devastated areas quickly. The resources and authority alone make them invaluable.

In lui Your points have no basis when you can't come up with an argument that out weighs the good they do. Unfortunately there's nothing better out their because if there were they'd be using it.
I'll stand to be corrected, but: partially true. (And not because I disagree with you, but as a pre-emptive strike against nitpicking hehe.) As noted earlier, FEMA became notorious after Hurricane Katrina for trying to dictate disaster relief, of course it now exists to assist in disaster relief. However, FEMA does cost money when idle. You're right though, it's largely not people sitting around twiddling their thumbs, but the creation of emergency plans, maintenance of equipment, training personnel, etc. It's money "bled" over time to ensure FEMA actually has any logistical capacity when mobilised, without which there would be weeks, months or even years between the onset of a disaster and the provision of relief.

Big government, small government, whatever. As Dom argued, it's cheaper for one federal government to upkeep a relief force large enough to work in several states simultaneously than it is fifty state governments upkeep fifty relief forces. It's nothing to do with entitlement, it's everything to do with fiscal common sense.
 

Liberty

Active Member
Liberty, you know better then that. Congress passing an emergency bill? The reason that FEMA was organized so that they can be dispatched with funds at a moments notice. Congress takes days to unzip their pants let alone pass anything in time to help.
The fact is that they can. They have done it many times. Look at how fast they passed the Patriot Act without even taking the time to read it. And here, we are just talking about a one time spending bill vs. legislation that rips the Constitution to shreds.

This statement has no fact behind it and it's a bit naive. Small communities can not possibly have the specialists on hand. The fact you seem to be forgetting is that a disaster hits multiple cities and towns. The specialists that are used to rebuild are not just from the state but are brought in by FEMA from all over the U.S.
How do you think it was done before FEMA? Or do you like all the bumbling and huge waste of money that FEMA has proven themselves guilty of?


*COUGH *COUGH FEMA *COUGH *COUGH. I love it when the point comes back to the very thing they argue against. Liberty, I appreciate your arguments, but it seems your knowledge on FEMA is extremely limited. FEMA is not an army of people who sit around waiting for an emergency. FEMA organizes people to come together from other states as well as local services. They have the funds to get these people and equipment to the disaster site in the quickest possible way, usually through the military.
You really should ponder for a few minutes what you just said. No offense, but it ain't me who is the naive one.

They have the Federal authority that allows them to use the highways and airways in order to get to those devastated areas quickly. The resources and authority alone make them invaluable.
COUGH, COUGH.... You don't seem to be aware of their incompetent actions and enormous waste of money.

In lui Your points have no basis when you can't come up with an argument that out weighs the good they do. Unfortunately there's nothing better out their because if there were they'd be using it.

I gave you points. What about the millions spent on the FEMA trailers that went to waste? What about all the volunteers shut out from helping people? What about that coliseum nightmare that FEMA oversaw? I can give you pages worth, but alas, you are another one who don't think anything is possible without nanny.

- - - Updated - - -

Big government, small government, whatever. As Dom argued, it's cheaper for one federal government to upkeep a relief force large enough to work in several states simultaneously than it is fifty state governments upkeep fifty relief forces. It's nothing to do with entitlement, it's everything to do with fiscal common sense.

Diggo, most things are actually handled much more efficiently the closer they are to the problem. It is very rare that there is any fiscal savings for doing much of anything at the federal level vs. the state level.

But, I am curious. What in your mind was the reason our Founding Fathers designed our form of government such that the majority of power would be one, with the people, then with the states, and only enumerated a very few things for the federal government?
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser34

What does the length of time it has been around have to do with anything?
The length of time has everything to do with it. FEMA has been around for longer than the disastrous example it is today. The difference is how it is handled today verses early 1990's. You are using the Katrina forward example of FEMA and calling it a failure. That is hardly fair, nor accurate.
As I said before a couple of times, Congress can always pass a one-time aid bill to assist if it is absolutely necessary. FEMA is not needed in order to do that.
hmmmm...now mathematically speaking that is just plain....yeah never mind It makes more fiscal/governmental sense to interrupt making laws and governing to pass legislation based on something that they have no idea the enormity of...yes? Or is it wiser to have a fund set up, and a game plan in place with protocols ready to go at a moments notice?
This is the problem and they got that way, because the federal government became their nanny. It has made our country weak; not to mention the people. They no longer believe they can do anything without government telling them when and how to do it. Our country will not survive if this mindset continues.
Just because people do not save, and do not plan ahead, we can not allow infrastructures to fail. Does it get under my skin to see people who are ignorant and obnoxious enough to not look to the future, and cost me what I have worked hard for? Hell yes, but it is what it is. We can't have people starving and cold as they are up in New England right now. Not to mention, and this is probably a bunny trail, but people who are suffering not because they didn't plan ahead, but for fear of leaving and having looters come and take it away. We as a society created this mess, and taking away a unified plan of action for disasters is NOT the answer.
What do you mean, "demand"? Hell no, no one has the right to demand anything at all from the pockets of another person, and you don't have the right to do it, even if you think you do by utilizing government to steal for you what you wish them to steal.
Why do you keep talking about this as if it is just a fiscal issue? A state can't demand the national guard to move, and do you think the State Reserves are enough to handle a disaster? Really? I think not, as most of them would also be dealing with their own portion of the disaster. And yes when it comes to mobilizing various federal resources, which mind you just in scale would trump a states, YES the federal government can most definitely demand it.
That said, we have never had an emergency when Americans from all over the country have not pitched in by droves. Yet, you want the nanny state and you got it.
People from all over the country pitch in....And as I have pointed out, once the disaster is over, and the volunteers leave, who is left to help these people pick up the pieces?

FEMA was established in 1979. The Great Depression was quite a bit before that. lol. But, it's nice to know you're all for big government force though. A conservative, you ain't.

Do you realize how ridiculous what you said, sounds? Beyond the nanny state mentality that you promote, there are other governments besides the federal government. As far as people are concerned, I have more faith in them than you do, apparently.

Again, there are state and local governments, but you know, if people realize they cannot count on big brother to come bail them out, they will quickly learn to stand on their own two feet.

No, you aren't. You argue for the nanny state. There isn't a thing conservative about that.
Since you seem to be having a hard time reading what I write let me help you a bit.
I AM A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE
This means, I believe in a balanced budget, I believe in financial
wisdom. This does not mean I think there is no use for the federal government. Seeing as when the constitution was drafted there were how many states? Covering how many square miles, with how many citizens? I'd say times have fairly changed. Now, I do believe more power needs to be shifted to the states, more decision making, more rights....but that isn't to say that it needs to go back to the Articles of Confederation...der...yep...no.

The principles they laid out in that document haven't changed one iota; neither have the enumerated powers. If you are unclear what they meant on any part of the Constitution, just read the Federalist Papers.

There is a replacement. You just have become conditioned to the federal government doing everything.

What are you talking about? Do you need a copy of the Constitution, or something? Or a list of the failures of FEMA?

Since when is it "wild" to believe that states should take care of disasters in their own states, with help from their neighbors. And if it is a horrendous disaster, that the Congress pass a one-time aid bill to help?

The little experiment that our Founders gave us of liberty is coming to a close and sooner than I think a lot of people even realize.
These last few parts of your rant are useless...I am not even going to respond. Except to say, the "wild" was based on your comment about the DoE. However, in regards to welfare, FEMA, etc etc etc....I happen to believe that there is a need, but the way the federal government is handling it is poor. THAT DOES NOT MEAN I am all for a nanny state. And I will tell you, I DON'T TAKE A DAMN THING FROM THE GOVERNMENT....So while I agree some people need help, I am NOT for a nanny state. You can have assistance without entitlement. You can not can FEMA and expect success without finding a replacement plan.
Now, you point another finger about my politics, I'd suggest you utilize a dictionary. got it?
 

DeletedUser

I'll stand to be corrected, but: partially true. (And not because I disagree with you, but as a pre-emptive strike against nitpicking hehe.) As noted earlier, FEMA became notorious after Hurricane Katrina for trying to dictate disaster relief, of course it now exists to assist in disaster relief. However, FEMA does cost money when idle. You're right though, it's largely not people sitting around twiddling their thumbs, but the creation of emergency plans, maintenance of equipment, training personnel, etc. It's money "bled" over time to ensure FEMA actually has any logistical capacity when mobilised, without which there would be weeks, months or even years between the onset of a disaster and the provision of relief.

Big government, small government, whatever. As Dom argued, it's cheaper for one federal government to upkeep a relief force large enough to work in several states simultaneously than it is fifty state governments upkeep fifty relief forces. It's nothing to do with entitlement, it's everything to do with fiscal common sense.

FEMA has funding that is given to them by congress. When they need more money they have to walk into congress and supply all kinds of info and submit even more info on why. Just like many other Government agencies. I disagree that Katrina made them well know, I think 3 Mile Island made them famous as well as Niagra Falls. I understand we're talking Early '80's, but that was really put them on the map. I worked for FEMA on four different occasions, half of those in Florida. We were on site an hour after the Govenor asked for help. The response time was amazing which saved lives. There's no way Congress could ever be that quick as Liberty thinks it could. I've been holding off talking about HUD, mostly because Liberty thinks Congress handled the disasters and I'm not sure how far back you have to go to find Congress handling Federal Emergancies on a regular basis, but HUD, DOD, General Service something or other, before that I think it was Office of Emergancy Planning, I think... There were a lot of agencies handling Emergancies before FEMA in 1979. All of them were failures and just couldn't do the job, then Jimmy brought FEMA in and now we have an agency that does the job, Liberty thinks emergancies can be handled by states, even though states can't because of the sheer logistics involved and Congress isn't going to change a darn thing.
 

DeletedUser34

FEMA has funding that is given to them by congress. When they need more money they have to walk into congress and supply all kinds of info and submit even more info on why. Just like many other Government agencies. I disagree that Katrina made them well know, I think 3 Mile Island made them famous as well as Niagra Falls. I understand we're talking Early '80's, but that was really put them on the map. I worked for FEMA on four different occasions, half of those in Florida. We were on site an hour after the Govenor asked for help. The response time was amazing which saved lives. There's no way Congress could ever be that quick as Liberty thinks it could. I've been holding off talking about HUD, mostly because Liberty thinks Congress handled the disasters and I'm not sure how far back you have to go to find Congress handling Federal Emergancies on a regular basis, but HUD, DOD, General Service something or other, before that I think it was Office of Emergancy Planning, I think... There were a lot of agencies handling Emergancies before FEMA in 1979. All of them were failures and just couldn't do the job, then Jimmy brought FEMA in and now we have an agency that does the job, Liberty thinks emergancies can be handled by states, even though states can't because of the sheer logistics involved and Congress isn't going to change a darn thing.
I think the idea of FEMA is a good and necessary one....however, because it is so large, and so outsourced, if that word works....it has a lot of waste. I think the coordination needs to come through there, but the states should have the majority right to decide what is spent where and when....what goes to a particular location and who gets priority. They would know better and more immediately. I think FEMA is so large with so many hands in the pot it wastes a TON of money. Money that could be saved and used elsewhere in the governemnt.
 

DeletedUser

Diggo, most things are actually handled much more efficiently the closer they are to the problem. It is very rare that there is any fiscal savings for doing much of anything at the federal level vs. the state level.

But, I am curious. What in your mind was the reason our Founding Fathers designed our form of government such that the majority of power would be one, with the people, then with the states, and only enumerated a very few things for the federal government?
Yes, it is more efficient for the state to coordinate how resources and personnel are used, but basic maths says not so when it comes to ownership. How do you expect the upkeep of fifty state disaster relief forces to be smaller than federal upkeep of a force large enough to service "only" several states simultaneously? By my maths that is about one fifth the cost, four fifths less waste.

I'm not going to pretend I sat at the table with the Founding Fathers, but there was a reason they created the federal government, and it was to better manage affairs that affect multiple states as perceived in the context of the eighteenth century. Every state needs its own roads, schools, utilities, etc, things that stay operational within the state 24/7. Things that do not stay permanently operational, such as a disaster relief force, are better shared between states to save on costs. Enter federal government...
 

DeletedUser34

OHHHH don't let Diggo fool you...he did sit at the table with the founding fathers...he is in league with Dinosaurs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top