Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

by Original Quill Sat Sep 02, 2017 5:06 pm

First topic message reminder :

Business Insider wrote:Texas and Louisiana will need billions from Congress after Hurricane Harvey — here's how they could get it

Bob Bryan,
Aug. 31, 2017, 8:30 AM

As Harvey continues to slam the coastal parts of Texas and Louisiana, Congress is starting to plan how to address the need for disaster recovery, rebuilding of infrastructure, and reshaping of affected areas.

The debate over funding has already been reignited political conflict between Texas Republicans who voted against Hurricane Sandy aid and some lawmakers from the Northeast where the storm hit in 2012. But it is virtually guaranteed that Congress will pass some sort of package soon after it returns from its August recess.

Based on the latest negotiations and discussions, it appears there are three avenues Congress could take:

Multiple, targeted bills: According to Politico's Burgess Everett and Sarah Ferris, one idea from Republicans is to dole out money for Harvey relief over a series of bills that target specific needs. "My view has always been that multiple bills are fine, but you're better off to pass multiple bills knowing what the costs are than some number that no one can really justify," Sen. Roy Blunt, a member of GOP leadership, told Politico.

One major standalone relief package: Most major storms of the past few decades have received a lump sum from the federal government spent over time via various agencies. Congress passed a nearly $52 billion bill a week after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf. It passed a $50 billion package two months after Hurricane Sandy. Many Republicans, however, criticized the lump approach after Sandy because it included at least some money for projects unrelated to the storm. But a single bill would still most likely serve as a down payment, with the total recovery needs unknowable this early.

Attach the bill to another must-pass piece of legislation: Another option that has been floated is attaching the relief package to a must-pass piece of legislation like a bill to raise the debt ceiling or a continuing resolution to fund the government. Such legislation would make it tough for members to vote against the package and would probably draw more support to a large relief package.

GOP Sen. Tom Cole told Politico that Congress may require extra time to assess the damage of the storm, but he stressed that the body would pass something. Thirty-four GOP senators votes against aid for Hurricane Sandy.

"Most of the people who couldn't bring themselves to vote during the Sandy thing, now the shoe's on the other foot," Cole said.

Ask yourself: are their new, fancy homes more important than our needy children getting hot lunches? Of course, we could always cut defense spending. Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers? - Page 2 2190311264

Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers? - Page 2 2190311264

http://www.businessinsider.com/hurricane-harvey-congress-relief-fund-bill-options-2017-8

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:24 pm

Thorin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

That's a pretty accurate statement of where the USA is today. The country is fractured, and there is no sentiment for unity.

And you are continually ensuring by such views, that it continues to fracture more and more.

I don't see another option. Certainly Texas will not be there for New York or New Jersey, when the next Hurricane Sandy comes around. It's either give and give, or just give in...

It is, however, a perfect opportunity for California to consolidate with the rest of the West Coast. There's unity there.

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:29 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:You do not condemn something horrible, where some elected, made an appalling vote, to then argue off that former wrong. To then arguing for doing the same wrong.

It's deeper than just elected officials. As yourself, how did they get elected if everyone is against them? Everyone is not against them.

There are two distinct populations in America today. You saw them clash in Charlottesville. That's not the end of it.

When a nation becomes polarized, it is impossible to put it back together again. One side, if it gives an inch, the other side will take a mile. The only options you have aare one-sided peace, or no peace. Eventually, the sole option is no peace.

Personally, I believe this is an ideal opportunity for California to break away and do it's own thing. It's the only path to unity...at least in our small Pacific way.

So you are blaming the entire people of Texas, based on how some voted and then not knowing how some would then when in power vote on a disaster. This making all Texans culpable.

Its like blaming all British people for any policies or votes in the House of Commons, no matter whether its a Tory, Labour or Liberal in charge.

Its poor guilt by association

So it was impossible to put Japan and Germany back together after WW2 then?

Talking nonsense again and it seems you wish for the US to further divide itself. Where even worse you think people cannot think for themselves what is best for the future.

Well that is good for you that you wish to break away from the rest of the United states and say fuck you to all the rest of Americans. Now I know you have said you would take in others from the rest of the US, but how are you going to accommodate the possibility of tens of Millions?

You see, you never think anything through and how if such a cessation happened, it would majorly effect the rest of the US economy. Having also an effect on the Californian economy.

So the reality is, you do not want to help fix problems in the US, you would rather simple break away and create ten times more problems. Failing to actually resolve anything.

Hope you have the infrastructure set up for all those tens of Millions of Democrats that will want to settle in California.

by Raggamuffin Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:30 pm

I read that some Senators voted against the Hurricane Sandy relief bill because it contained spending that was nothing to do with the hurricane.

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:38 pm

Thorin wrote:So you are blaming the entire people of Texas, based on how some voted and then not knowing how some would then when in power vote on a disaster. This making all Texans culpable.

It isn't working, didge. That's just a statement of fact, regardless of blame. Sometimes you just need to walk away.

Here we have a perfect opportunity for California and the West Coast to consolidate itself into something good and magical. Things would be perfect now, had we let the South walk 150-years ago. Now we have the god-given opportunity all over again. Nature rarely gives a second chance...we can't pass this up.

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:43 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:So you are blaming the entire people of Texas, based on how some voted and then not knowing how some would then when in power vote on a disaster. This making all Texans culpable.

It isn't working, didge. That's just a statement of fact, regardless of blame. Sometimes you just need to walk away.

Here we have a perfect opportunity for California and the West Coast to consolidate itself into something good and magical. Things would be perfect now, had we let the South walk 150-years ago. Now we have the god-given opportunity all over again. Nature rarely gives a second chance...we can't pass this up.

That is simple your opinion, so you have made up the minds of many people, who clearly do not share your views.

I certainly back self determination, so why is it then that independence does not have such support in California?

I see no planned referendum, do you?

That is the major flaw in your plan, let alone the selfish nature of it. One that does not want to resolve the problem, but attempt poorly to push some of it away.

So that is not a chance, its simple setting yourself up for yet more problems, when you should look to tackle the problems at had. Not create more of them.

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:51 pm

Thorin wrote:I back self determination, so why is it then it does not have such support in California?

It's a growing movement. When we finally learn that the USA is nothing but a satellite Russian criminal enterprise, i'm convinced the majority will come over. Wait until Mueller and the New York attorney general finish their investigation. People will evacuate the US in droves.

California and the West are the healthy limb. The rest has grown cancerous, and infection is even setting in. We need surgery to save the good parts remaining, lest the entire corpus dies with the advancing malignancy.

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:55 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:I back self determination, so why is it then it does not have such support in California?

It's a growing movement. When we finally learn that the USA is nothing but a satellite Russian criminal enterprise, i'm convinced the majority will come over.

California and the West are the healthy limb. The rest has grown cancerous, and infection is even setting in. We need surgery to save the good parts remaining, lest the entire corpus dies with the advancing malignancy.

Is it?

All I see is your views on this, not the majority of the people of California.

Kind of a double standard, to be welcoming immigrants into California, by then breaking away from the rest of the US.

It seriously makes no sense

Or will you introduce a Trump style immigration policy based denying immigrants with Republican beliefs?

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:07 pm

Thorin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It's a growing movement. When we finally learn that the USA is nothing but a satellite Russian criminal enterprise, i'm convinced the majority will come over.

California and the West are the healthy limb. The rest has grown cancerous, and infection is even setting in. We need surgery to save the good parts remaining, lest the entire corpus dies with the advancing malignancy.

Is it?

All I see is your views on this, not the majority of the people of California.

Kind of a double standard, to be welcoming immigrants into California, by then breaking away from the rest of the US.

It seriously makes no sense

Or will you introduce a Trump style immigration policy based denying immigrants with Republican beliefs?

Fox News wrote:Officials announce proposal that would establish California as separate nation
January 27, 2017

A proposal for California to secede from the United States was submitted to the Secretary of State’s Office Thursday.

The proposed “Calexit” initiative - its name borrowed from the UK's "Brexit" departure from the EU - would ask voters to repeal part of the state constitution that declares California an inseparable part of the U.S.

A recent poll found that one in three California residents would support a possible secession from the U.S. due to their opposition to President Trump. No mention has been made of the president in the proposal.

If the proposal qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it could be a step to a future vote on whether the state would break away from the rest of the nation.

More on this...

Poll reveals 1 in 3 Californians support 'Calexit'

Secretary of State Alex Padilla said the group behind the proposal, Yes California Independence Campaign, was cleared to begin attempting to collect nearly 600,000 voter signatures needed to place the plan on the ballot.

"In our view, the United States of America represents so many things that conflict with Californian values, and our continued statehood means California will continue subsidizing the other states to our own detriment, and to the detriment of our children," the Yes campaign's website says.

Similar attempts to establish California as a nation, or break it into multiple states, have failed.

The proposed constitutional amendment, titled California Nationhood, would also ask voters to repeal language that states the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law. If approved, it calls for scheduling a vote in 2019 to ask voters, "Should California become a free, sovereign and independent country?"

"America already hates California, and America votes on emotions," Marcus Evans, vice president of Yes California told the Los Angeles Times. "I think we'd have the votes today if we held it."

The campaign must submit the valid voter signatures by July 25 to qualify for the ballot.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The times they are a-changing, didge. This is a movement that is growing as we watch. Before, we didn't have Trump. We didn't have a dysfunctional Republican government. We didn't have the Russian mafia involved. We didn't have Charlottesville.

Now the USA is a trash Trumpster (pun intended). Lol. California is pristine and clean. Right-thinking people will come over to California in droves. It's just another form of democracy...leave the trash behind. Laughing

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:10 pm

So two thirds are against.

Not a very good sign for you Quill, which I bet will all go very quite if a democrat President is voted in next time.

Which goes back to my original points you failed to answer

Kind of a double standard, to be welcoming immigrants into California, by then breaking away from the rest of the US.

It seriously makes no sense

Or will you introduce a Trump style immigration policy based denying immigrants with Republican beliefs?

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:15 pm

Thorin wrote:So two thirds are against.

Ahhh...but it's growing, as I said. And, if you pay attention to current events, all the momentum is on the 'Yes' side. Just wait until the results of the Mueller investigation come in, and we learn the revolution has already occurred...and the US is a part of the Russian Federation.

The back door is on the West Coast. C'mon over, y'all.

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:So two thirds are against.

Ahhh...but it's growing, as I said. And, if you pay attention to current events, all the momentum is on the 'Yes' side. Just wait until the results of the Mueller investigation come in, and we learn the revolution has already occurred...and the US is a part of the Russian Federation.

The back door is on the West Coast. C'mon over, y'all.

66.6% against and you think its gaining momentum

Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers? - Page 2 3489511464

So again for a third time

Which goes back to my original points you failed to answer

Kind of a double standard, to be welcoming immigrants into California, by then breaking away from the rest of the US.

It seriously makes no sense

Or will you introduce a Trump style immigration policy based denying immigrants with Republican beliefs?

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:19 pm

Thorin wrote:66.6% against and you think its gaining momentum

Yes, big time. Can't wait. cheers

by JulesV Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:20 pm

error

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:20 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:66.6% against and you think its gaining momentum

Yes, big time. Can't wait.

A fourth time asking

Which goes back to my original points you failed to answer

Kind of a double standard, to be welcoming immigrants into California, by then breaking away from the rest of the US.

It seriously makes no sense

Or will you introduce a Trump style immigration policy based denying immigrants with Republican beliefs?

by JulesV Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:22 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Where does it say that the people who lost their houses voted to deny help to others?

since when has that been how the senate works?

SENATORS for Texas(ted cruz) voted to deny aide to Hurricane Sandy Victims in 2013

Ya.
I made my post after reading stuff like this all over the place > >

by Victorismyhero Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:32 pm

I can see several problems involved with your brilliant suggestion of calexit

1) the rest of the usa could, were it to deem it right, squash you like a bug
2) what, apart from hippies and oranges, does california produce
3) you are virtually out of water, desperate in fact, and require it being sent from surrounding areas....what if they decide to "turn off the taps?

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:38 pm

Jules wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

since when has that been how the senate works?

SENATORS for Texas(ted cruz) voted to deny aide to Hurricane Sandy Victims in 2013

Ya.
I made my post after reading stuff like this all over the place > >

Hi Jules, great to see ya. I watched your clip, and I agree. But what good does it do to condemn Cruz and Cormyn for their crass politics. The only question is, will they do it again. Christ yes, they will do it again! So unity is not a possibility.

Here is my litmus test for unity: if Neil M. Gorsuch will step down from the Supreme Court, as he was illegally appointed, then I will consider working with the other side. If, on the other hand, they won't give up their ill-gotten gains, then fook 'em.

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:51 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I can see several problems involved with your brilliant suggestion of calexit

1) the rest of the usa could, were it to deem it right, squash you like a bug
2) what, apart from hippies and oranges, does california produce
3) you are virtually out of water, desperate in fact, and require it being sent from surrounding areas....what if they decide to "turn off the taps?

I pointed this out before to Quill.

Of course they have a massive economy, but how viable would that be on separation.

I am interested to know on where Quill has said before he would welcome people in with similar views, like Democrats.

Would he then be denying also many people based on religious and political beliefs, like Trump has through such an immigration policy?

What about those who already live there, who are not Democrats?

He seems to want to avoid answering this.

Hey ho

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:04 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I can see several problems involved with your brilliant suggestion of calexit

1) the rest of the usa could, were it to deem it right, squash you like a bug
2) what, apart from hippies and oranges, does california produce
3) you are virtually out of water, desperate in fact, and require it being sent from surrounding areas....what if they decide to "turn off the taps?

It's not nearly the problem that you guys will have without Europe and the EC.

California will be just fine. We've got the aircraft industry, the entire computer industry and software industry, our San Joaquin Valley feeds one-third the US, and if we get Baja California to join us, We've got Cabo. cheers

Plus, we've got the entire Pacific world at our trading disposal. sunny

by Guest Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:13 pm

So again Quill avoids the points and questions

Catch you all later

by Original Quill Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:28 am

Thorin wrote:So again Quill avoids the points and questions

Catch you all later

Didge, be realistic. The questions you are asking are about policy matters. I'm a mere advocate. I can't make policy for the whole State of California. An independent California can govern itself any way it sees fit.

Right now, California has a Senate and an Assembly. I am neither a Senator or an Assemblyman. I suggest you put your questions to them.

by Sponsored content

Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?

Re: Hurricane welfare...should we finance the lazy benefits-mongers?