Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 19 to 26 of 26

Thread: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

  1. #19

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    Except for the federal deficit, unemployment, and the housing market. The bill is eventually going to come due, as someone is eventually going to have to pay for all of this propping up.

    I can keep paying my mortgage and other bills with a credit card, but eventually I have to pay my credit card bill. Of course, the government has a different alternative, they will just raise taxes on the upper and middle classes.
    So, debt has just began in the past year in the U.S. government?
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  2. #20

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by RYou View Post
    As far as I can determine, when FEMA provides financial assistance to anyone affected by a disaster - floor, tornado, quake - it is through low interest loans that must be repaid, not through free grant money for replacement costs that is not insured. If you're a flood victim, in a flood zone and have not purchased flood insurance, you're out of luck even with FEMA. You can't even get one of their loans.

    It actually gets pretty messy when a homeowner with a pre-existing mortgage takes on a FEMA loan. I heard of some situations where the bank tried to step in and take the land rather than allow the homeowner to rebuild with too much debt.
    Pretty much correct. My home was flooded in 2008, and if you have flood insurance, the best that you will qualify for is a low interest loan, or the hopes of a buy out. If you do not have flood insurance, you actually are more likely to get direct grant money from FEMA.

    Once the disaster hits and it is declared, who has flood insurance or not doesn't seem to make much difference. It didn't seem to in Iowa in 2008.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  3. #21

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    So, debt has just began in the past year in the U.S. government?
    That can't be the best response, can it? Obama has taken spending to new levels, which I believe will be unsustainable. Bush and his cronies loved to spend our money, but Obama makes Bush look like a piker.

    And for the record, before anyone accuses me of only noticing debt when Obama came into office (which you did obliquely), that's not the case at all. I didn't support Bush's spending on bailouts and entitlements either.

  4. #22

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    That can't be the best response, can it? Obama has taken spending to new levels, which I believe will be unsustainable. Bush and his cronies loved to spend our money, but Obama makes Bush look like a piker.

    And for the record, before anyone accuses me of only noticing debt when Obama came into office (which you did obliquely), that's not the case at all. I didn't support Bush's spending on bailouts and entitlements either.
    Yes, it is the best response. Like $5,000 per second (literally) in Iraq was/is "sustainable," and for what? To pay for an execution of a leader?

    Trust me, the new mantra (among others) who oppose America and hope that it fails is that suddenly debt is a new thing. At no point in U.S. history have we ever operated in the black, and if it was "sustainable" back then, why have we always operated in the black with no evidence of "sustainability?"

    If that is money well spent, well then the majority of Americans who are happy with what is going on right now will be overjoyed!
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  5. #23

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    Trust me, the new mantra (among others) who oppose America and hope that it fails is that suddenly debt is a new thing. At no point in U.S. history have we ever operated in the black, and if it was "sustainable" back then, why have we always operated in the black with no evidence of "sustainability?"
    Well, I don't oppose America or hope that it fails, nor do I think that debt is a new thing. Ascribing those sorts of motives to citizens who want a smaller government is underhanded and dishonest.

    There are different levels of debt though, which should be obvious to anyone interested in an honest debate.

    Greece thought that their debt was sustainable as well. It's sustainable until it isn't, then you're F-ed.

  6. #24

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    Ascribing those sorts of motives to citizens who want a smaller government is underhanded and dishonest.
    When has government gotten smaller in our lifetime? "Big" government is a trend that we keep demanding, whether it be Dept. of Homeland Security, prescription drug benefits, or government sponsored health care.

    I was also hoping that you would say that. Shall we review?

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D15K5CZAJJg"]YouTube- Joe Scarborough Says Voters See Limbaugh's Cheering Olympic Defeat as Indication GOP Gone Off "Deep-End"[/ame]

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifpnK6Uwyqw&feature=related"]YouTube- Americans For Prosperity Cheer United States 2016 Olympic Bid Loss[/ame]

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuYjWbAU2eU"]YouTube- Rush Limbaugh: "I hope Obama fails"[/ame]
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  7. #25

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    When has government gotten smaller in our lifetime? "Big" government is a trend that we keep demanding, whether it be Dept. of Homeland Security, prescription drug benefits, or government sponsored health care.

    I was also hoping that you would say that. Shall we review?
    I didn't demand DHS, drug benefits, or govt sponsored health care. Who is "we"? Just because government hasn't gotten smaller doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a good thing.

    I watched your YouTube links, just to try to figure out your point. In summary, Rush Limbaugh said that he hopes Obama fails, and then some people in a conference room were happy when Chicago didn't get the Olympics.

    Remind me again how that has something to do with out of control government spending, and my opinion that it's unsustainable. Your answers thus far:

    Government is getting bigger all of the time, everybody wants it that way

    Bush spent a lot of money so Obama spending more is no big deal

    Rush Limbaugh wants Obama to fail

    Some people in a conference room were happy that we didn't get the Olympics

  8. #26

    Default Re: Should the Feds bail out tornado damaged areas?

    I'm not economist, so I may be understanding this wrong... but consistently spending more than you take in HAS to have serious reprocussions at some point, doesn't it? America can't borrow money and drive up the national debt indefinitely, no matter who is in power.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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