Christians Provide More Aid To Hurricane Victims Than FEMA

[Weatherman2020]

This thread validates how insane and fascist the left are.

 

[OldLady]

I would like to think that the money helps people who didn't have insurance to rebuild their lives. However, does the Red Cross give out cash? What do they actually do with their money?

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

I would like to think that the money helps people who didn't have insurance to rebuild their lives. However, does the Red Cross give out cash? What do they actually do with their money?

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

 

[Conservative65]

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

 

[OldLady]

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

What I was meaning to say is that ANY PLACE can experience a disaster of one type or other. Should we all move out of North America?
And I believe I was also making the point that helping major cities rebuild is an investment in the country's economy.

 

[rightwinger]

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

 

[Conservative65]

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

 

[Conservative65]

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

 

[Pogo]

THIS JUST IN --- New study reveals that ex-cigarette smokers give more aid than people who know what the capital of South Dakota is without Googling....

 

[Pogo]

One thing that I always wonder about at times like this is the efficiency of donations between groups. In other words, there are always groups (and individuals) who are great and do fundraising, but I have to wonder if it's just smarter for everyone to just give to the Red Cross. I don't know how the systems work, but I'd think that such a setup would maximize coordination and reduce redundancies, among other things.
.

I would like to think that the money helps people who didn't have insurance to rebuild their lives. However, does the Red Cross give out cash? What do they actually do with their money?

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

What I remember from twelve years ago is we were issued a Citigroup bank card loaded with a finite amount of money (don't remember how much, I think about $2000) to use on those essentials including shelter/rent, until it ran out. FEMA also gave you a separate check for documented lost property, in my case a submberged car, once you furnished documentation. I remember that it was when I first acquired a digital camera for that purpose since there were tons of pictures to take.

For me at least it was handled very efficiently. I surely didn't make a profit but I did get a bridge to normalcy to keep up until regular life could be adapted to and restored and the system worked well.

We did go to a local shelter, probably because they had electricity and internet. It may have been a Red Cross operation, not sure. Strangely enough it never occurred to me to ask around for the religious affiliations of those who were running it. Nor did it occur to me to find out their astrological signs, their shoe sizes or whether they knew what the capital of South Dakota was. What was I thinking.

 

[Pogo]

I would like to think that the money helps people who didn't have insurance to rebuild their lives. However, does the Red Cross give out cash? What do they actually do with their money?

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

In the case of New Orleans the flooding was the fault of the government's own negligence. And that was the Army Corps of Engineers' choice.

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

And that's why the OP of this thread is a flaming false dichotomy.

 

[Pogo]

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

If FEMA is handing it out, that's not privately donated money.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?

Regardless of how you try to play off how FEMA funding isn't really giving anyone anything, it still involves funding through mandated taxes not voluntary donations.

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

And that's the part that completely mystifies the sociopaths. "Empathy" is a foreign concept to these subcreatures.

 

[rightwinger]

Why do you think the federal government should be involved when the reason people are where they are is because of their own choices?
North America has a pretty high incidence of weather related disasters, from forest fires and tornadoes that happen in all 50 states, to periodic hits from hurricanes and occasional spring floods that are much higher than normal due to heavy rains. I understand your argument for people living on the banks of the Mississippi or 50 yards from the Atlantic in Florida who do not choose to have insurance. But NO ONE could have predicted what would happen to Houston and such a major city in this country needs help from the government for more hard nosed reasons than just being "nice." Houston gives back to this country's economy in a big way. We have to get it off its knees for our own benefit.

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

Sorry....but most Americans want to belong to a country where we help our people in a time of need

 

[Pogo]

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

Sorry....but most Americans want to belong to a country where we help our people in a time of need

The sociopaths by contrast want to be their own island. With lotsa guns so they can keep out any threat of their mortal enemy, "community".

 

[Conservative65]

I would like to think that the money helps people who didn't have insurance to rebuild their lives. However, does the Red Cross give out cash? What do they actually do with their money?

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

What I remember from twelve years ago is we were issued a Citigroup bank card loaded with a finite amount of money (don't remember how much, I think about $2000) to use on those essentials including shelter/rent, until it ran out. FEMA also gave you a separate check for documented lost property, in my case a submberged car, once you furnished documentation. I remember that it was when I first acquired a digital camera for that purpose since there were tons of pictures to take.

For me at least it was handled very efficiently. I surely didn't make a profit but I did get a bridge to normalcy to keep up until regular life could be adapted to and restored and the system worked well.

We did go to a local shelter, probably because they had electricity and internet. It may have been a Red Cross operation, not sure. Strangely enough it never occurred to me to ask around for the religious affiliations of those who were running it. Nor did it occur to me to find out their astrological signs, their shoe sizes or whether they knew what the capital of South Dakota was. What was I thinking.

Didn't you have insurance or are you one of those that decided not to get it then expect the government to offset things?

 

[Conservative65]

I asked for a reason and you gave me excuses.

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

Sorry....but most Americans want to belong to a country where we help our people in a time of need

So you do support forcing those that didn't make bad decisions to offset things for those that did? I bet you're one of those that believes by doing so those making bad choices will see the error of their ways and do better next time.

 

[rightwinger]

The reason is because we are America and we do not say "fuck you" to people struggling because of a natural disaster

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

Sorry....but most Americans want to belong to a country where we help our people in a time of need

So you do support forcing those that didn't make bad decisions to offset things for those that did? I bet you're one of those that believes by doing so those making bad choices will see the error of their ways and do better next time.

Yup...that's the way things work in a society

You may not agree with all the decisions a society makes but you are bound by them. You receive much more benefits from belonging to a society than you can as an individual

 

[Pogo]

Didn't have insurance? You mean someone chose not to have insurance and now want others to help them?

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

What I remember from twelve years ago is we were issued a Citigroup bank card loaded with a finite amount of money (don't remember how much, I think about $2000) to use on those essentials including shelter/rent, until it ran out. FEMA also gave you a separate check for documented lost property, in my case a submberged car, once you furnished documentation. I remember that it was when I first acquired a digital camera for that purpose since there were tons of pictures to take.

For me at least it was handled very efficiently. I surely didn't make a profit but I did get a bridge to normalcy to keep up until regular life could be adapted to and restored and the system worked well.

We did go to a local shelter, probably because they had electricity and internet. It may have been a Red Cross operation, not sure. Strangely enough it never occurred to me to ask around for the religious affiliations of those who were running it. Nor did it occur to me to find out their astrological signs, their shoe sizes or whether they knew what the capital of South Dakota was. What was I thinking.

Didn't you have insurance or are you one of those that decided not to get it then expect the government to offset things?

"Insurance" on what? Levees?

Nope. Not my responsibility is it.

I had insurance on my car of course, and the first step in getting compensated for it was getting a statement from the insurance company that being submerged in eight feet of water wasn't covered. Not that it was ever a question but that's how the paperwork works to make it official.

 

[Conservative65]

You don't understand the difference between reason and excuse.

If someone chooses to not do something they should do then expects others to be forced to offset their bad choice, I have no problem saying "fuck you". That's what they say to those they demand offset the results of their bad choices.

It is not an excuse...It is what Great Countries do.....Look out for the less fortunate

Serves you right sucker is not what Great Countries say

When you admit the fault is with the person making the choice yet you want to force those that didn't make the choice to offset it, it's an excuse.

Sorry....but most Americans want to belong to a country where we help our people in a time of need

So you do support forcing those that didn't make bad decisions to offset things for those that did? I bet you're one of those that believes by doing so those making bad choices will see the error of their ways and do better next time.

Yup...that's the way things work in a society

You may not agree with all the decisions a society makes but you are bound by them. You receive much more benefits from belonging to a society than you can as an individual

At least be honest enough to admit those worthless pieces of shit making bad decisions are freeloaders and offer no benefit to society.

 

[Conservative65]

If charitable organizations want to help them, what skin is it off your nose?

It's not about what others do but about what those that made a choice not to have insurance expect. I don't care if a private charity chooses to do that. I have the option if they do decided to help those that made bad choices about not having insurance to not donate. Things change drastically when the government starts providing money to those that chose not to have it.

I'm not real clear on what the government actually does pay. I know they've got that Flood Insurance Program that despite those folks who pay premiums, is billions in the red. Then I hear FEMA was handing out emergency cash on hand (to apparently anyone?) at $500 a clip, and a couple thou to help people get a place to rent. Those are pretty generous, I'd say, but it helps get people out of the shelters. I would guess most people managed to grab their wallet when they fled their homes, even if they were rescued in a boat. The $500 might be extremely welcome to those who live paycheck to paycheck and would be hurting bad from days or weeks without work. People with $3.78 in their bank accounts and that's it. I've been there before and a disaster like Harvey would have left me and my son right on the street. There is no way I ever had the extra money for Renters Insurance either. I was usually left deciding which bill would be paid late so I could buy groceries.

So anyway, what the feds primarily do is help local and state governments rebuild infrastructure and pay all their overtime by first responders and shelter employees and all the others involved in righting the world after a disaster. They make available low interest LOANS, I hear. Not give aways.
I could be wrong.

What I remember from twelve years ago is we were issued a Citigroup bank card loaded with a finite amount of money (don't remember how much, I think about $2000) to use on those essentials including shelter/rent, until it ran out. FEMA also gave you a separate check for documented lost property, in my case a submberged car, once you furnished documentation. I remember that it was when I first acquired a digital camera for that purpose since there were tons of pictures to take.

For me at least it was handled very efficiently. I surely didn't make a profit but I did get a bridge to normalcy to keep up until regular life could be adapted to and restored and the system worked well.

We did go to a local shelter, probably because they had electricity and internet. It may have been a Red Cross operation, not sure. Strangely enough it never occurred to me to ask around for the religious affiliations of those who were running it. Nor did it occur to me to find out their astrological signs, their shoe sizes or whether they knew what the capital of South Dakota was. What was I thinking.

Didn't you have insurance or are you one of those that decided not to get it then expect the government to offset things?

"Insurance" on what? Levees?

Nope. Not my responsibility is it.

You live in a bowl. Whose responsibility is it if not those that live there?