Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
The Power of III
Joined
·
1,365 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Interesting editorial piece making a poke at the "state sovereignty agenda" - so I thought I'd share:

Link:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2010/may/07/editorials-federal-disaster-aid-welcomed/

State officials from the Gulf Coast to Nashville have solicited federal assistance to help their states and citizens recover from recent man-made and natural disasters.

The federal government has responded with federal disaster area declarations, and manpower and equipment.

The declarations will be a tremendous aid in helping state and local governments repair the billions of dollars in damage caused by last weekend's storms and flooding. The declarations will make financial and housing assistance available to families whose homes have been severely damaged or destroyed by the storms or flooding.

In Memphis, and Shelby and Tipton counties, the declaration will help families from Frayser to Millington to Atoka start to rebuild their lives.

In the Gulf of Mexico, the Coast Guard and federal agencies are working with states and British Petroleum to prevent a major environmental and economic disaster from the 200,000 gallons of oil a day spewing from a sunken oil rig.

That's something to chew on for those pushing a strict state sovereignty agenda. They'll say, of course, there is a big difference between the feds forcing programs, such as health care and education reform, down states' throats, and helping states cope financially with disasters.

But is there really that much of a difference? In both instances, the federal government is looking out for the best interests of its citizens. The flooding caused millions of dollars in damage in Memphis and Shelby County, and even worse damage in Nashville and its surrounding counties.

Gov. Phil Bredesen said he will ask the legislature to dip into state reserve funds to help cities and counties pay for repairs that federal disaster relief does not cover. With austere budget projections, could Memphis, Shelby County and Tennessee muster the financial resources needed to tackle the damage without federal assistance?
more at link above
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
16,867 Posts
But is there really that much of a difference?
Yes, there is a big difference in forcing someone to do something, and helping someone.

Health care - forcing someone to buy a product is not "helping".

Providing a temporary house for someone after a flood - now that "is" helping.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
Doesn't Matter

Doesn't matter either way. We are only a source of MONEY for THEM that are running things. If THEY let too many people die then there will be a loss of CAPITAL and the possibility of civil unrest. So THEY help a little.

Look at Katrina & New Orleans. That was the biggest disaster screwup ever! FEMA was a JOKE! All those FEMA trailers were a RIP-OFF! DEVIOUS persons made money off of this debacle. People lost everything and still are recovering today. Some people never made it and moved away if they didn't die first. People lost their pets to foster homes to never get them back; a foster home was supposed to be temporary not permanent (there was a PBS show on this).

But there is a difference asking and forcing something and with the way things are headed expect a LOT of FORCING stuff down our throats!

It's all about the MONEY! GREED!!!

:upsidedown:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
424 Posts
If we didn't have to pay a ridiculous amount of federal taxes, there would be more money to help ourselves. Federal government taxing and spending sucks the oxygen out of the economy and the Federalist ideal. States could just as easily take the amount of money they pay to the fed and create a reserve fund specifically to handle disasters. (or any number of other potential challenges)

There are plenty of methods of handling disasters other than Big Daddy Fed jumping in...however most of those are limited because...Big Daddy Fed destroys most of the other options.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
In this day and age it really it has to be that the feds help. It has been designed that way over the last 100 years or so to give the power to the feds. Because they take all of the money the states have or could get. Then they give it back. It is all about control at the federal level. Take lots of money and give a little back. Keep them hungry and unable to provide for themselves.

Now if they states all decided to go back to apportionment then the states would have the money they needed and the feds could stay out of it. Plus this would be the way it was designed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
It is amazing how dependent Americans have become on Gov't because they "can't" make it without the government. In times of disaster it should be up to our neighbors, family, church, and perhaps insurance to recover from a disaster. We have gotten away from "community" and gone to "government."

It always amazes me when I pay federal taxes, only to have those taxes trickled back down to the local level--after losing much of its value due to overhead.

BTW, I personally experienced my house being destroyed from a storm--but didn't require FEMA to help me. We rebuilt with insurance, family, and neighbors all helping make repairs.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top