Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 101 to 118 of 118

Thread: House Scraps Vote on Hurricane Sandy Aid

  1. #101
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    The lesson appears to be to be killed or demaged only in large-scale events, 9-11, Sandy, Katrina, etc.

    In that spot, you're great, Govt. takes care of you.

    Just have your House burn down or a Storm destroy just your house or the like, best of luck, you're on your own.



    What is it about size that suddenly makes an event a public responsabillity?
    No, if you burn down you're good. People on the same block in Breezy Point, some covered by their insurance because the wind-swept fire got to their house before the water and burned it down. They were the 'lucky ones'.

    You can't make sense of any of this. But if money is earmarked to FEMA for recovery, then that money should be spent in these ways I think. If you don't want money marked for FEMA for natural disaster recovery, that's where your issue is.

  2. #102
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,927
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    No, if you burn down you're good. People on the same block in Breezy Point, some covered by their insurance because the wind-swept fire got to their house before the water and burned it down. They were the 'lucky ones'.

    You can't make sense of any of this. But if money is earmarked to FEMA for recovery, then that money should be spent in these ways I think. If you don't want money marked for FEMA for natural disaster recovery, that's where your issue is.
    -------- <--------My position

    <--------Your Head


    The issue is not "do not want money for aid".

    /facepalm

  3. #103
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    -------- <--------My position

    <--------Your Head


    The issue is not "do not want money for aid".

    /facepalm
    Oh, it's one of those days, huh?

    I do not think that means what you think it means, friend.

  4. #104
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,927
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    Oh, it's one of those days, huh?

    I do not think that means what you think it means, friend.
    If what you got from my many posts here is "no aid for natural disasters", then yes, it means exactly what it says on the tin, and having a semantics argument about it is boring.

    Suffice to say, no, my position is not "no aid".

    Appreciate the feedback tho.

  5. #105
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    If what you got from my many posts here is "no aid for natural disasters", then yes, it means exactly what it says on the tin, and having a semantics argument about it is boring.

    Suffice to say, no, my position is not "no aid".

    Appreciate the feedback tho.
    I was responding to one post, and didn't realize it was from early in the thread (damn you, tapatalk!). If you're position changed or was clarified since you made that post, add I guess it was, I missed it. I am surely glad to see that you feel that sometimes FEMA should use natural disaster relief/recovery funds to aid in natural disaster relief/recovery.

  6. #106
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,927
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    I am surely glad to see that you feel that sometimes FEMA should use natural disaster relief/recovery funds to aid in natural disaster relief/recovery.



  7. #107
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,339
    Quote Originally Posted by Axil View Post
    I think most conservatives are in favor of disaster relief, actually.



    I find this sentiment interesting though. It's a common thought, but one i can't find the logic in. Aren't most things (that matter anyway) black or white?

    I've always been of the opinion that if you're seeing somthing as grey, you haven't broken down the components far enough. At certain level of granularity, everything is black or white.
    I always felt shades of gray came from over-analyzing, but there are tons of examples of grayness in the world.

  8. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    well this took a weird series of turns.

    First, props to both PK and palmetto for sticking to their beliefs and despite that, defending a conservative, and attacking a conservative, respectively.

    Second, now that I know that being outside of a govt-determined flood zone guarantees nothing (I should known not to trust a flood zone map from the govt! ), I have looked into flood insurance via the National Flood Insurance Program and have gotten a very good quote for insurance. And this was NOT guilt from palmetto's posts - this was from talking to the nice FEMA people back in December.

    Third, I don't know if conservatives actually think I'm conservative anymore, but there MUST be some midway point between "you're on your own" and "here's thousands of dollars for strippers and booze". As Obi-wan said "only the Sith speak in absolutes".

    To be honest, I encounter this a lot with people in my local Tea Party, which I find very disturbing.
    Hey, good job on investigating a quote.
    Was not trying to terrorize you, just advise and/or help. None of us has all the answers (right ones anyway) but many of us can bring sound practical input. That's why even presidents seek input.
    You're still a conservative. Just one that got caught in a disater.

  9. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetworks View Post
    All very fair points, but in the case of 9/11, there were clear intelligence indicators that an attack was imminent. Therefore, the government is liable for failing to act in an appropriate manner. Just as a doctor would be for missing the signs that someone had cancer, not for failing to predict it. But yes, ultimately the offending party is liable for the action. I suppose "martyrdom" makes that concept harder to digest.

    As for first responders such as myself, the government would owe us nothing as that was what we signed on for (more or less). Their culpability lies in putting forth official statements by the regulatory bodies that stated the conditions were safe to work in, or short of that, providing the necessary equipment to function in a hazardous area.



    Guess I really hit a nerve. Sorry, but I stand by everything I said. Your failure to address even one point I raised speaks volumes, imho. Kudos on holding the line, tenuous as it is.
    Didn't answer your post because I'm not big on name calling. You usually refrain, but.... There are some here who are name callers without any intelligence. those I'll take a shot at.
    Point though: if you "trust" the government in an assessment that conditions are ok for you in anything, you are making a mistake. That's why there are professionals. I trust my lawyer, accountant, broker and insurance advisors - each in their areas of expertise. I trust the government on NOTHING. That's a healthy piece of advise.

  10. #110
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,786
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Didn't answer your post because I'm not big on name calling. You usually refrain, but.... There are some here who are name callers without any intelligence. those I'll take a shot at.
    Point though: if you "trust" the government in an assessment that conditions are ok for you in anything, you are making a mistake. That's why there are professionals. I trust my lawyer, accountant, broker and insurance advisors - each in their areas of expertise. I trust the government on NOTHING. That's a healthy piece of advise.
    Pulled the crappy portion of my post out yesterday as I realized it was unwarranted. I felt the rest of my post(s) was salient. Agree to disagree on the finer points...

  11. #111
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,729
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    I trust the government on NOTHING. That's a healthy piece of advise.
    But you have no problem with them operating a military armed with nuclear weapons.




    Sent from a phone using an app

  12. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    But you have no problem with them operating a military armed with nuclear weapons.




    Sent from a phone using an app

    I have always differentiated between the government and the U.S. military.
    Our military leadership consists of people who have actually been trained. Unlike the bozos who sit in Congress or the Executive branch.

  13. #113
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,729
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    I have always differentiated between the government and the U.S. military.
    Our military leadership consists of people who have actually been trained. Unlike the bozos who sit in Congress or the Executive branch.
    What about ex Military politicians?

    You trust them?

  14. #114
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,557
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    What about ex Military politicians?

    You trust them?
    Ex military politicians? See Vader, Darth.

    Same tired old story.

  15. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    What about ex Military politicians?

    You trust them?
    Some ok. Some not.
    Ike pretty good. He was a very senior guy.
    It's been a while since a general was an elected official. The others were mostly mid officer rank at most. Some ok. Some eh. Certainly not "players" in the military.

    Lindsay Graham, Senator ffrom SC is a military reserve officer. Pretty honest guy. Certainly more than Chuck the Schmuck or Obama.

  16. #116
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,927
    House approves $50.7B Sandy aid bill


    Published January 15, 2013

    Associated Press


    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2I8tcygni

    Guess it all worked out ok after all.

  17. #117
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,339
    its like a Sandy Stimulus: I'm not keeping the money, I'm reinvesting it in the local economy (new roof, new patio doors, new boiler, new tools, new lawnmower, etc).

  18. #118
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,557
    So the House passed this two weeks ago, and the Senate finally got around to it yesterday. And not a peep of outrage? Got it.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us