Californians fires

[MidGe]

Genuinely interesting post, adios, no sarcasm intended.

I am a bit dubious about whom got in receipt of the $127 billions. Maybe like the Iraq war costs it goes to Bush and his cronies.


I do seem to remember that some foreign monies got returned. I didn't get mine back, and I know people who have lost all and need it the most, albeit not any longer in New Orleans didn't get their "fair" share.


Anyway I'll try to check out what went to the people renting rooms and surviving from music in New Orleans, etc..

[NasEscobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I watch the news, here, in Australia, my thought go to all those people that have lost their houses and possessions (and some indeed their lives or loved ones lives) in California those past days.

I was disturbed by also being forced to watch President Bush promise (another promisee, another lie) those Californians that they will not be forgotten in Washington and that help was forthcoming.

Assuming that President Bush was not lying, a big ask, I understand, what would make those Californians different from the many from New Orleans that are still waiting, regardless of even the international support and donations that that catastrophe generated?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've got some exciting news for you, your contributions are welcome here:

Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund

I'm happy that you're contributing. As far as feds ignoring people in need of Katrina relief, first time in history that spending $127 billion amounts to ignoring disaster victems plight.

The Big Easy’s Billion Dollar Boondoggle


Here’s a pop quiz: How much money has Uncle Sam spent on New Orleans and the Gulf region since Hurricane Katrina ripped the place apart?

I’ll give you the answer because you’ll never guess it. The grand total is $127 billion (including tax relief).


and

Perhaps all this money should’ve been directly deposited in the bank accounts of the 300,000 people living in New Orleans. All divvied up, that $127 billion would come to $425,000 per person! After thanking Uncle Sam for their sudden windfall, residents could head to Southern California and buy homes that are now on sale thanks to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and bid up the sagging house prices in the state.


[/ QUOTE ]
And yet there are still areas in New Orleans that look like Katrina just hit yesterday.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I watch the news, here, in Australia, my thought go to all those people that have lost their houses and possessions (and some indeed their lives or loved ones lives) in California those past days.

I was disturbed by also being forced to watch President Bush promise (another promisee, another lie) those Californians that they will not be forgotten in Washington and that help was forthcoming.

Assuming that President Bush was not lying, a big ask, I understand, what would make those Californians different from the many from New Orleans that are still waiting, regardless of even the international support and donations that that catastrophe generated?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've got some exciting news for you, your contributions are welcome here:

Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund

I'm happy that you're contributing. As far as feds ignoring people in need of Katrina relief, first time in history that spending $127 billion amounts to ignoring disaster victems plight.

The Big Easy’s Billion Dollar Boondoggle


Here’s a pop quiz: How much money has Uncle Sam spent on New Orleans and the Gulf region since Hurricane Katrina ripped the place apart?

I’ll give you the answer because you’ll never guess it. The grand total is $127 billion (including tax relief).


and

Perhaps all this money should’ve been directly deposited in the bank accounts of the 300,000 people living in New Orleans. All divvied up, that $127 billion would come to $425,000 per person! After thanking Uncle Sam for their sudden windfall, residents could head to Southern California and buy homes that are now on sale thanks to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and bid up the sagging house prices in the state.


[/ QUOTE ]
And yet there are still areas in New Orleans that look like Katrina just hit yesterday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is the point of the article more or less. With all the government money spent in the recovery from Katrina in New Orleans the place isn't even close to being rebuilt. Kudlow says this:

So the billion-dollar question becomes: Where did the rest of that money go?

Meanwhile, according to an article by Nicole Gelinas at the Manhattan Institute, New Orleans has earned the distinct honor of becoming the murder capital of the world. The murder rate is 40 percent higher than before Katrina, and twice as high as other dangerous cities like Detroit, Newark, and Washington, D.C.

Think of this: The idea of using federal money to rebuild cities is the quintessential liberal vision. And given the dreadful results in New Orleans, we can say that the government’s $127 billion check represents the quintessential failure of that liberal vision. ...

Remember President Reagan’s line during the 1980 campaign about how LBJ fought a big-government spending war against poverty, and poverty won? Well think of all this Katrina spending as the Great Society Redux. And it failed. I suppose the current Bush administration would like to label this “compassionate conservatism.” But guess what? That failed, too.

Right from the start, New Orleans should have been turned into a tax-free enterprise zone. No income taxes, no corporate taxes, no capital-gains taxes......

[Jamougha]

[ QUOTE ]
How much money has Uncle Sam spent on New Orleans and the Gulf region since Hurricane Katrina ripped the place apart?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cute take all the costs of clearing up after a hurricane and then pretend it all went on lil' old Orleans.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How much money has Uncle Sam spent on New Orleans and the Gulf region since Hurricane Katrina ripped the place apart?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cute take all the costs of clearing up after a hurricane and then pretend it all went on lil' old Orleans.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying the vast majority of the money was spent on other places in the Gulf region and the Federal government hasn't spent enough on New Orleans. Also your implication is that other areas of the Gulf region hit by Katrina have recovered substantially while New Orleans hasn't. Some articles that would contradict those views:


Billions have been spent to rebuild the city, but not enough is reaching the local economy. Residents wonder where the funds are being spent.

Two Years Lster, Washington Money not Getting to Those in Need


Katrina Money Remains Unspent


Perhaps we just need to have a debate on what level of spending is appropriate and are the costs justified. I note that in one of these article that the claim was made that FEMA was low balling estimates of the costs of rebuilding. Why should we be willing to believe the locals and give them a blank check?

[InTheDark]

[ QUOTE ]
As I watch the news, here, in Australia, my thought go to all those people that have lost their houses and possessions (and some indeed their lives or loved ones lives) in California those past days.

I was disturbed by also being forced to watch President Bush promise (another promisee, another lie) those Californians that they will not be forgotten in Washington and that help was forthcoming.

Assuming that President Bush was not lying, a big ask, I understand, what would make those Californians different from the many from New Orleans that are still waiting, regardless of even the international support and donations that that catastrophe generated?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
James Madison is the acknowledged father of the constitution. In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia. James Madison wrote disapprovingly, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
In 1854, President Franklin Pierce vetoed a popular measure to help the mentally ill saying, “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity.” To approve the measure "would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.”

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
During President Grover Cleveland’s two terms in office, he vetoed many congressional appropriations, often saying there was no constitutional authority for such an appropriation. Vetoing a bill for relief charity, President Cleveland said, “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit.”


[/ QUOTE ]

Their misfortune is no Constitutional entitlement to my treasure, a long forgotten truth.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Their misfortune is no Constitutional entitlement to my treasure, a long forgotten truth.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, we know where to place you on he scale of empathy for others.

I am presuming that you are part of a real minority in the US. Of course there is a lot of evidence that shows that you may not be part of such a minority after all!

[manbearpig]

Semi off topic, but I thought is was kind of funny. Radio bit this morning had a fake Gov Schwarzenegger on talking about the fire.

One of his lines was "dont worry, President Bush has assured me that the War on Fire is just beginning."

[MiloMinderbinder]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their misfortune is no Constitutional entitlement to my treasure, a long forgotten truth.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, we know where to place you on he scale of empathy for others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Empathy has nothing to do with fact.

Fact: The US Constitution does not authorize the federal govt to seize assets to relieve individual suffering. The Constitution makes no prohibition on state and local govts from taking action or from individuals giving freely on their own accord, however.

Americans have shown over and over again to be extremely generous in helping each other and those around the world following a disaster without needing their contributions coerced from them by force.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Fact: The US Constitution does not authorize the federal govt to seize assets to relieve individual suffering.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain how Congress providing tax relief to Californians is not covered by this clause of the Constitution.

Also, please explain how disaster management expenditures (such as FEMA grants, etc.) are not covered under this clause, either.