Should FEMA exist?

[Ariesman81]

With the advance warning of most of today's weather systems, should The government step in to help areas that continually get hit by natural disaster?

[Anonymous]

No, and technically FEMA is unconstitutional, as is the idea of the federal goverment giving domestic aid for natural disasters.

This is also very bad policy as other have mentioned your simply forcing all of America to subsidize people not properly adapting to the reality of the local geography.

The Federal Government was created to defend you from forign states not your own geography.

Every attempt Washington makes to subsided living in dangerous areas they not only put more unprepared oleo at risk they impoverish the rest of America in the process.

FEMA like the charitable ideas that created it, while well intention by naive lawless people was really just creating bigger problems.

[Ariesman81]

Eloquent, logical and oh so correct!👍🏻

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

FEMA is federal, like the post office. For all intents and purposes, FEMA is the government’s attempt at stepping in. And yes, they should do so. Charities are not always reliable (remember that whole scandal with the Red Cross after 9/11?) but public services are services meant to aid and assist the public and are usually managed by government entities, which are among the most powerful in the nation. With the power to rule also comes the responsibility of making sure you have a community to rule over, you need to keep people happy, healthy, and wealthy if you want to continue to be a governing entity in charge of them and charge taxes. Otherwise, one way or another, the people will reject their leaders and there’s a lot more followers than there are leaders and the smart ones know that they need to appeal to the majority in order to keep their jobs.

[RowdyYates]

How did the government run out of money?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

The rumor that fema is running out of money is just that, a rumor. It’s not this $750 stuff that’s getting spread around

[RowdyYates]

Who is the director of Homeland Security?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Google says it’s Alejandro Mayorka

[RowdyYates]

Bingo! He said on national/world TV, that FEMA was broke. So before you call it a rumor, just know that this is coming from your team.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

That was also a week ago, and according to the American Press article I found on this exact subject, House Speaker Johnson said that they had given FEMA the funds necessary and trusted local lawmakers to allocate it. And since Mayorka never gave a specific number of how much money FEMA needed, it’s most likely that he was speaking to create the urgency needed to get them to act. FEMA is not without funds, they’re just worried they won’t have enough to sustain multiple states that might experience 3-4 hurricanes over the next 3 months as it’s hurricane season. If it really is as well and truly dire as a sensationalized news article suggests, I’m sure congress will meet to redirect funding to them when they have none to give.

[RowdyYates]

You make a very valid point. In 300 years, money will no longer be a thing. Without money, their won't be corruption. But until then, we shouldn’t switch paddles in the middle of the stream. FEMA needs to get their shit together and help these people.

[Ariesman81]

I remember when FEMA bailed on the Red River Valley in North Dakota. Smartest move they made. Hundreds of millions a year in aid. For what? so they can park a new tractor in the flood zone the following year? Stupidity.

[RowdyYates]

It's a touchy subject, and I understand that. Many moons ago, my step dad said it wasn't fair that insurance rates go up for people living in safe areas, to pay for the payouts for people living in risky places.

[Ariesman81]

That's why I use local insurance companies.

[Syntosi]

So basically, you are asking if we should live in a society or not? I dont know about you but I am squarely in the "Want to live in a human society" rather than roughing it out by myself in some cave with my trusty pointy stick and bashing rock.

[Ariesman81]

No... I'm asking... if people choose to live in an area that continually gets hammered by natural disaster... should the government bail them out?

[Syntosi]

I see no difference in this. Either you live in a functional society where the government protects you or you do not.

[Ariesman81]

So if I build my house on the bank of a river, and every year my house floods during high water, you'll come help me every year? And you don't mind that your insurance rates are higher? Because I refuse to move. After all, look at this beautiful view!!!

[Syntosi]

That is what things such as building codes are for.

[Ariesman81]

You're naive

[Syntosi]

How so?

[monorprise]

@Syntosi If you view "society" as the dopes that help you build and rebuild your house upon a foundation of sand every times the wind or whatever other natural local condition brings it down.
Then your correct we don't want to share such a 'society' with you, and frankly you shouldn't want us to.

If your narrow minded or dumb enough to keep living that way in that area, then only someone who wanted you dead would keep giving you money to make it possible.

[Syntosi]

@monorprise Society includes everyone. Also, its building regulations that decides how to build a home that won't get destroyed every year or so.

[Ariesman81]

The same institution that will allow me to a multi million dollar residence below sea level in New Orleans? Sure, but it doesn't make it a wise decision.

[Syntosi]

Sounds like you want to revise some building regulations. Cool. You can do that.

[Ariesman81]

Regulation huh? What I ultimately want is for people to be held accountable for poor choices. And for the government to stop stepping in and playing Daddy. But, pain is an uncomfortable feeling. Yet, that's where growth comes from. Your Daddy should have taught you that.

[Syntosi]

That is a very childish worldview.

[Ariesman81]

I knew you'd see it my way

[Syntosi]

No, you have a very childish worldview which I can only assume is driven by emotion because it makes very little actual sense.

[Ariesman81]

It will someday

[monorprise]

@Syntosi
Just because I don't want to bankroll your own high risk behavior as I judge it doesn't mean I have a right to forbid you from behaving as such at all. Nobody else is there, we don't know what risks your prepared to take nor what the risk really is better than you who are.

Building regulations are an unjustifiable offense against the natural right of men to think and act for themselfs, just as you attempt to force me to so act with my money in bankrolling such behavior is an offense against my right to act separately.

Let them do what they choose to do, but do so with their own money. If their judgement be good they will benefit enough in the time with what they build to pay to rebuild, otherwise our refusal to help will keep them from needlessly risking their life and remaining wealth again.

[monorprise]

@ariesman81 point of view is quite grown up. Only a child is protected from themselfs and bailed out. @Syntosi

[Syntosi]

@monorprise That is not why it is childish. It is childish because his main opposition come from him not wanting other people to receive assistance or be happy. He wants them to "suffer consequences" which is an incredibly immature mindset.

Why? Because it does not solve anything and only makes the world a worse place for no other reason than to give gratification to him. It is morality on the level of a children cartoon villain.

Also since we are on the topic, libertarian economic arguments and views are also incredibly stupid.

[Ariesman81]

I believe there are plenty of people who deserve assistance. The point is... if I have to assist you every year... maybe you're taking advantage of my generosity. In which case... my assistance is no longer offered and you can continue making foolish mistakes on your own dime.

[Syntosi]

Again, childish. I literally dont care if people exploit my generosity if its achieving something I care about. You keep getting caught in your own feelings and pride. Not once have you made an argument about how its actually BAD for someone to exploit you in some objective terms.

[Ariesman81]

Experience will do that for you. The irony is... which maybe you're unaware of... is that this interaction has only solidified my belief that consequences are the only way to grow. And that no matter how much assistance is offered, it will fall on deaf ears. So... thank you.

[Syntosi]

Oh, I am not here to help you grow or mature as a person and having you react like a belligerent child is entirely on brand.

Having experience does not mean that you become a better person unless you learn how to process that experience into something useful. If you want an example then we can take men who grew up in abusive families and turned to crime. They grew up with a lot of experience that they were unable to process into something worthwhile which resulted in them being burdened by those experiences rather than built up.

That is you right now. A child that can't process the experiences they have had and unable to become a functional part of society.

[Ariesman81]

The only advice I'll offer is to stop following your mother.

[Syntosi]

Oh dont tell me you are a sexist as well. Do you honestly believe in that whole male and female rolemodel nonsense? Or even worse, that whole trite about feminine men and masculine women being the problem in modern society. This is just getting worse..

[Ariesman81]

You used the word sexist... but I think you meant to say right

[Syntosi]

Ah, so it is as I feared then. Gotcha. Yeah, you are a lost cause.

[Ariesman81]

Yeah... it definitely appears that way

[monorprise]

@Syntosi Adults takes responsibility and suffer the consequences of their own actions. It is children who are protected both from the actions and often consequences.

People neither learn nor in reality need to learn if they don't face the consequence of their actions. Because the only consequences that matter to people is the ones they actually face.

Few people particularly in heterogeneous "diverse" countries care about the community, because that community is not them. The moredistance or "diverse" that community is the less it is in their interest to care at all.

That is called self-interest and why collectivism fails worse in the largest and most diverse countries.

We have to leave the indiviual free but responsible for their own choices. Because the community doesn't know better and as such can only ever be oppression or subject to scamming in its stupidity because of that collective apathy and ignorance.

[Syntosi]

@monorprise Adults takes into consideration more than their personal feelings on a matter. If they have to drink medicine even though it tastes bad then they will still drink it because they recognize that it is for their own best even if it goes against their natural instinct of avoiding things that tastes bad.

Your perverse obsession with punishment and consequences is quite frankly barbaric and only justified by your desire to see people suffer. Lets just make up an example to demonstrate how stupid your worldview is.

Lets say growing up as a kid you put your hand on the stove because you did not understand that it would burn you. This obviously meant that you suffered the consequences of your actions by experience horrible pain and permanent scarring on your hand.

Now, growing up as a parent you employ your patented method of parenting, by not protecting your child from touching the stove and instead letting them explore the world for themselves and potentially burning themselves on the stove like you did so that they would suffer the same consequences that you had already done in the hope that they too would supposedly "learn" from that.

In other words, you did not teach your kid jack shit and you did not raise them to be better than you in a better world than you grew up in. With your stupid form of reasoning we would not have progressed society past the caveman era as everyone would be stick relearning the same lessons and suffering the same consequences as their ancestors, over and over again forever.

It is a stupid way to live for stupid people.

[monorprise]

@Syntosi Its true adults do take more into consideration than children, but that doesn't mean they care about you being worse off if they are better off in their judgement.

Punishment is just what we are referring to as a vegetative consequences providing an incentive for something being in your int rest. I don't desire to see any one suffer, but I know they will suffer and if I let them as you are doing by giving them our money they will cause me to suffer too.

Suffering is simply dealing with negative consequences, this is not avoidable, unfortunately however it is transferable.

Children are only different from adult in that for want fora fully deluded mined and experience they lack a comparable capability to make good judgements. It is the job of a parent to protect them until such time as the children have theses feature. It is jointly in the interest of the patent to do this because the children represent their future.

[Syntosi]

@monorprise Perfect. So what you just confirmed is that I did not misrepresent your position in my example and that you are completely unable to see the problem with it.

To put it bluntly, you have failed to demonstrate the maturity required to even comprehend what I just said and talking to you is a complete waste of my time.

[Ariesman81]

Yep... that's what we're saying

[Syntosi]

So basically, all my arguments still stands and you are still only making an argument based on your personal emotions. From my point of view you two are the children that is fully deluded, the difference is that I do not hold out hope that you will ever grow up and take responsibility or however you want to put it.

[Ariesman81]

@monorprise I'm glad there's men like you around. It's getting harder and harder to stand up for the truth. And it's unfortunate that so many people need to burn their hands on the stove. But to be honest... I'm sure my father went through the same shit with me when I was younger. Keep up the good work.

[Syntosi]

It is harder and harder to stay ignorant in a world that is getting more and more enlightened. It has never been an issue to stand up for the truth since it is the truth that carries the burden of proof, not me.

[JesterRose]

I see no reason the government shouldn’t help its people in a time of need.


That being said they should never prevent it’s citizens from helping each other either.

[Ariesman81]

At what point does it become enabling?

[monorprise]

@JesterRose
How about the fact that these united States are a continental spanning federation with a wide range of different geographic conditions each with different kinds of living requirements and risks.

When you allow a distant common goverment in unavoidable ignorance of that reality your just subsiding people living unprepared in various areas at the expense of safer areas.

If anyone is really narrow minded or dumb enough to keep living that way in that area, then only someone who wanted them dead would keep giving them money to make it possible. That is all FEMA is really doing.
Not search and recurse which is conducted by local State forces but writing checks to rebuild.

[DryGermanGuy]

Oh boy, here we go...

Next stop: "Should the department of education exist?"

[RowdyYates]

Seriously? 😂😂😂

Do Germans need the government to wipe their asses?

[monorprise]

Perhaps you @DryGermanGuy don't understand this but every American State has their own department of education and the only thing the federal department does is write checks to enable unelected federal politicians to tell the elected state and local leaders what to do to get that money.

The effect of which is an dysfunctional kitchen with 3 chefs 1 of which has never even seen the customer.
There is a reason Education has stagnated or declined in the 60 years since the federal department of education was created, so of course we shoudl abolish it.

[exitseven]

Yes, but there needs to be a shakeup in management.

[monorprise]

@exitseven Do you really believe, we will ever retain unelected politicians in distant Washington D. C. with the knowledge and concern for other people's money. To only hand out checks to rebuild in safe areas?

Most insurance companies do a poor job at assessing risk, they at least have the good sense to go out of business, leaving only the successful ones to set realistic rates for the area & structure.

The federal goverment just steals more from everyone with the good sense to live in safer areas/structures appropriate to their local geography. So that people in some states can live in beautiful areas without paying the full price.

If we cared about those people we would at least refuse to bankroll rebuilding there.
If your narrow minded or dumb enough to keep living that way in that area, then only someone who wanted you dead would keep giving you money to make it possible.

[missindiana93]

Not if there gonna waste money on illegals.

[Ariesman81]

I like you

[RedInnocent69]

Nope. Fuck the humans.