GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics


Register Now for FREE!
Join GreekChat.com, The Fraternity & Sorority Greek Chat Network. To sign up for your FREE account INSTANTLY fill out the form below!

Username: Password: Confirm Password: E-Mail: Confirm E-Mail:
 
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

  I agree to forum rules 

» GC Stats
Members: 325,133
Threads: 115,503
Posts: 2,196,062
Welcome to our newest member, Yodapolarisnupe
» Online Users: 1,129
3 members and 1,126 guests
austinyandxtz54, navane, Yodapolarisnupe
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-24-2004, 06:18 AM
kddani kddani is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Babyville!!! Yay!!!
Posts: 10,635
Will disaster relief affect voting?

With the hurricanes and the damage they have done (8 inches of rain in some parts of my area, severe flooding, 1000's of homes and businesses ruined) it seems that a lot of people are up in arms about the small amount of federal relief being offered. Many seem upset that billions of dollars are going overseas while the only relief being offered to them is maybe a 5,000 grant and 25,000 in a low interest loan. In a swing state like my own, I really wonder how this will have an affect on the voting.

Here's a story about the flood victim's views: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04268/384571.stm
__________________
Yes, I will judge you for your tackiness.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-24-2004, 09:41 AM
KSig RC KSig RC is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Who you calling "boy"? The name's Hand Banana . . .
Posts: 6,981
Re: Will disaster relief affect voting?

Quote:
Originally posted by kddani
With the hurricanes and the damage they have done (8 inches of rain in some parts of my area, severe flooding, 1000's of homes and businesses ruined) it seems that a lot of people are up in arms about the small amount of federal relief being offered. Many seem upset that billions of dollars are going overseas while the only relief being offered to them is maybe a 5,000 grant and 25,000 in a low interest loan. In a swing state like my own, I really wonder how this will have an affect on the voting.

Here's a story about the flood victim's views: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04268/384571.stm

$5000 x 3 million people affected = $15 billion . . . and that's a conservative estimate.

Add in the up-front cost of no- or low-interest loans . . . jesus, that's a lot of money.

I'm pretty sure everyone on the planet is pro-disaster relief, but it's hard for me to jive with these xenophobic, "BILLIONS OF OUR DOLLARS GO OVERSEES"-type sentiments, b/c they implicitly ignore the fact that billions of dollars are going right here, to hurricane and flood victims. It's always worse when it affects people personally.

That said - will it affect the election? Probably. Should it? Probably not, in this man's opinion - a ton of money is being thrown at the problem. I don't really get why this sort of damage is a federal problem, to start, but I feel like there is an enormous amount of cash going in, even if it seems small on an individual level.

Quick question for dani, since I'm far from the area - how much do people think would be satisfactory? How much is enough money?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-24-2004, 10:59 AM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,654
It is always a problem when people start to look to the government to solve all of their problems. IMHO, if you didn't have insurance, you were an idiot and should be SOL.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-24-2004, 01:48 PM
Munchkin03 Munchkin03 is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Home.
Posts: 8,256
Quote:
Originally posted by ktsnake
It is always a problem when people start to look to the government to solve all of their problems. IMHO, if you didn't have insurance, you were an idiot and should be SOL.
Once again...not that simple. I know your view of the world is quite myopic.

Are you even aware of all the things FEMA does? It's not welfare for lazy hurricane victims. It provides assistance to state and local governments to get their infrastructure back as soon as possible in order to allow people to return to work, school, and their homes. Less than 48 hours after people were allowed to return to the counties devastated by Ivan, roads that were washed out during the storm were repaired and fully operational again--thanks to FEMA. FEMA funded the state and local efforts to bring extra trucks to haul away debris, pays for crews to restore power and water to the cities affected by hurricanes, and all those other things you probably aren't even aware of.

For insured homeowners, they provide emergency grants or loans to provide for temporary housing (which often consists of trailers since hotels are usually booked to capacity after a major storm), repairs that can be done immediately, and other claims that an already taxed insurance industry cannot process right away. Remember, this is Major Storm #3 for Florida. For those who do not own their homes, temporary housing can be provided. For people who have lost their jobs (even temporarily) due to a storm, FEMA provides emergency grants. More assistance is given to the insured than to those who are not, as sometimes insurance does not cover every single loss that might occur on a piece of property. FEMA also funds counselors who come in order to help people who have lost homes and family members because of the storm, and legal counseling to those who might need it.

Now, please tell me how these people are "looking to the government to solve all of their problems." Please tell me how these people are "idiots."

---------------------
As far as the money impacting the election, I really doubt it will. The President isn't really in control of how much money is given for emergency management, and most people know that. The same stuff that's happening now has happened after every major disaster, regardless of administration. People get money, the President tours the "most devastated areas," so forth and so on.

Last edited by Munchkin03; 09-24-2004 at 02:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-24-2004, 02:01 PM
kddani kddani is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Babyville!!! Yay!!!
Posts: 10,635
The people affected in my area, Pittsburgh, as well as Wheeling WV and surrounding areas, don't have insurance for this sort of thing. It's never happened before. Regular homeowners doesn't really cover much in the event of flooding- flood coverage is totally separate and very very few people have it. This extreme of things has never really happened up here. So calling people "idiots" b/c they don't have insurance isn't really right. Also, a lot of the areas that were hit were very much lower middle class and people don't have the money to spend on that sort of insurance.

I really don't know how much money would be enough, i'm fortunate to live on a big hill that overlooks one of the hardest hit areas in PA. But I read the article, and I thought it was interesting. These are the undecided Joe six-packs that both candidates are going after. PA and WV are both swing states with lots of undecideds. So I just thought it could be interesting if it affected it at all.

It's not fair for any of us who've never been in this situation, to never have lost everything in your home or your business, to call anyone idiots or make judgements.
__________________
Yes, I will judge you for your tackiness.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-24-2004, 02:22 PM
Munchkin03 Munchkin03 is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Home.
Posts: 8,256
Quote:
Originally posted by kddani

I really don't know how much money would be enough, i'm fortunate to live on a big hill that overlooks one of the hardest hit areas in PA. But I read the article, and I thought it was interesting. These are the undecided Joe six-packs that both candidates are going after. PA and WV are both swing states with lots of undecideds. So I just thought it could be interesting if it affected it at all.
I see what you're getting at. I know that the two candidates are neck and neck in Florida, with Bush having a slightly smaller lead. I don't know who they were actually able to poll, and where. In light of recent events, the poll can't be too representative of the entire state.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-24-2004, 02:58 PM
WCUgirl WCUgirl is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,318
Quote:
Originally posted by ktsnake
It is always a problem when people start to look to the government to solve all of their problems. IMHO, if you didn't have insurance, you were an idiot and should be SOL.
In addition to what Munchkin explained, depending on where you live in Florida (only addressing FL b/c that's where my experience lies), and what time of year you move/apply for insurance, it's very hard to get hurricane coverage. When my sister moved from one area in FL to another area last year (in July, of course!), they almost lost the house b/c they couldn't get their carrier to cover their since they were in hurricane season, and they moved to a "more exposed" area. They were finally able to get it, but it's just an example of why people might not have that coverage. Not b/c they didn't want the insurance or have the $$$ for it, but b/c sometimes insurance carriers can be a pain in the butt!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-24-2004, 03:13 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,654
Quote:
Originally posted by AXiD670
In addition to what Munchkin explained, depending on where you live in Florida (only addressing FL b/c that's where my experience lies), and what time of year you move/apply for insurance, it's very hard to get hurricane coverage. When my sister moved from one area in FL to another area last year (in July, of course!), they almost lost the house b/c they couldn't get their carrier to cover their since they were in hurricane season, and they moved to a "more exposed" area. They were finally able to get it, but it's just an example of why people might not have that coverage. Not b/c they didn't want the insurance or have the $$$ for it, but b/c sometimes insurance carriers can be a pain in the butt!
It shouldn't be the federal government's responsibility to restore local and state infrastructure. That responsibility belongs to the providers of services, the municipalities, etc. IMHO. When the F5 tornado wiped out most of Midwest City here in the OKC metro, FEMA was out there basically handing out free $ to people that didn't have insurance -- yeah, they call it "grants".

If you move to such an area, it should be your responsibilty. If FEMA did not provide this service, the municipalities, state, etc. could do a fine job I'm sure.

It's perhaps necessary to some extent, just not nearly to the extent that it is used.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-24-2004, 05:50 PM
Munchkin03 Munchkin03 is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Home.
Posts: 8,256
Quote:
Originally posted by ktsnake
If you move to such an area, it should be your responsibilty. If FEMA did not provide this service, the municipalities, state, etc. could do a fine job I'm sure.
No, the smaller municipalities CANNOT "do a fine job" after having their entire infrastructure destroyed. (This is what's going on right now with my hometown, which has basically been blown off the map.) There's only so much a small town can do--especially when the larger cities that might normally help them out in a crisis can't do it. Right now, in Florida, the state is stretched to the limit. Three major hurricanes in a month, with every county of 67 having been declared a federal disaster area, exhausts the capabilities of a state rather quickly. I see no problem with the federal government stepping in when the situations are as severe as they are at this moment, when the state and local governments are stretched to their limits.

Until you experience a situation like this firsthand, you are in no place to judge what people should have or should not have done.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-24-2004, 06:06 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,654
Oklahoma City has had its share of natural disasters, thanks.

We did get FEMA money for Midwest City, OK when a mile-wide tornado came through with winds above 300MPH. It completely leveled the place. I mean there were almost NO standing structures remaining in the area.

As I recall, FEMA just gave money out to those folks some were insured, many weren't.

I'll guarantee you that Florida expenditures per citizen effected will probably end up being far above what they were here just because of the importance of the state in the election.

Just my guess.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-24-2004, 08:07 PM
AGDee AGDee is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,390
I am required to get flood insurance because I live in an A1 zone. That said, my neighborhood hasn't flooded in the 25-30 years since it has been built. It covers none of my personal property (I could purchase more, if I could afford it, but I can't). My regular home owners is $788 a year, my flood insurance this year was $1180. My home owners covers everything in my house, my flood insurance only covers the physical structure, furnace, hot water heater, and washer and dryer that are in the basement.

kddani was talking about the flood damage in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, where people don't usually buy hurricane insurance. The vast majority of people who aren't required to buy flood insurance, don't. It's not a crime to not buy insurance for something that is extremely unlikely to happen. It's extremely unlikely that people in some of these areas that flooded from Ivan would ever get as much rain in as short of a time period as they did.

I don't see why we would even consider turning our backs on our citizens, after they've lost everything they owned, their place of employment is destroyed or closed indefinitely. It's called compassion. You're just going to let families live on the streets with no access to their money, their belongings, anything? That would be completely barbaric.

Dee

ETA: I never answered the original question. I think it could affect the election because people tend to vote on how things are for them RIGHT NOW. I don't think that's fair, but it's the reality.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-24-2004, 09:32 PM
Munchkin03 Munchkin03 is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Home.
Posts: 8,256
Quote:
Originally posted by AGDee
I don't see why we would even consider turning our backs on our citizens, after they've lost everything they owned, their place of employment is destroyed or closed indefinitely. It's called compassion. You're just going to let families live on the streets with no access to their money, their belongings, anything? That would be completely barbaric.
But, according to some people, they deserve it because they didn't care about "personal responsibility" and expected the government to take care of everything.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-24-2004, 09:42 PM
OrigamiTulip OrigamiTulip is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,626
We've already seen this effect here in Orlando. When Charley hit on August 13, we were two weeks away from a primary election for sheriff. The incumbent completely blew his challenger out of the water. After the election, a lot of people interviewed said they had changed their vote because "he did a good job after the hurricane." Not to mention all the free airtime he got in those 2 weeks leading up to the election.
__________________
If a turtle loses his shell, is he naked or homeless?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:07 AM
AGDee AGDee is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,390
By Kerry Sanders
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET Aug. 12, 2004MIAMI - As hurricane season begins to pound its way home with the threat of Hurricane Charley and Tropical Storm Bonnie, coastal residents in Florida and throughout the southeast are frantically make preparations to ward off disaster. But even if the storm doesn't make landfall, they've likely already paid a tremendous price for living where they do.

advertisement

In the hurricane zone homeowners live in fear, and this year, it’s not only the storm threat, it's the cost of hurricane insurance.

Kathie Hartie in Galveston, Texas, like others near the coast in her state, is paying an average of 75 percent more than just four years ago. Her insurance bill this year will be $3,500.

“I've been here for 40 years. My family has owned this house and I would hate to not be able to live here because of the cost of insurance. Is it going to end? I don't know," said Hartie.

On the South Florida coast, the cost of insurance has spiked even more.

rest of article From another article
There's a 30-day waiting period on flood insurance from the time you apply to the day it's effective. If you wait to call your agent until the hurricane warnings go up, it's too late.

Likewise, when a hurricane watch or warning is announced, agents lose their "binding authority" -- their authority to enact insurance policies -- until the watch or warning is canceled.


They had interviewed someone on our local news in Detroit who had moved to Florida late this summer and wasn't able to get covered in time. Some folks can't afford an extra $4000-6000 a year, and others weren't able to get it when they tried. I still say it's barbaric to not help them.

Dee
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:44 AM
aurora_borealis aurora_borealis is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,106
As for loans with low or no interest why not? For people that are covered with insurance it does take time to have the insurance company come out and make an assessment, and then cut a check. The government is going to get that money back in the form of a loan so why be against that too?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.