Gene Kearns wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:16:05 GMT, Alotta Fagina penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

You wrote:

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 00:05:25 GMT, Alotta Fagina penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

You wrote:

http://nacocharters.org/documents/Ch...eetInPeril.pdf

"I lived in the path of Cat 5 'canes and it's the government's
responsibility to pay me millions. Wah wah wah."

****ing pussies.
So your point is that FEMA should change it's mission statement?
Did you attend first grade? Apparently not, since you don't know the
difference between "its" and "it's".


So shoot me, I made a typo.

Or do
you think they should not honor their obligation.. because.... uh,
because....?
Again, do you think they should not honor their obligations? Should
they ignore Federal laws?

Federal, state and local laws are ignored all of the time. Have you ever
heard of selective enforcement, selective prosecution and jury
nullification?

Because Chicago recovered from its fire without government money.
Specious argument: FEMA didn't exist.
Because San Francisco recovered from its fire without government money.
Specious argument: FEMA didn't exist.

Besides, you are making the case that devastation in one part of our
country doesn't affect the general welfare of the entire country.
Wrong.

No, the argument he is making is that when you live or place a business
in a disaster zone (flood, tornado, hurricane, earthquake, ...) you made
a conscious decision to do so and any harm done to you should be borne
by you.

That clause is "promote the general welfare" not provide for the general
welfare.

Because the constitution doesn't have language permitting FEMA to even exist.
So, why did George Bush elevate the agency to a part of the Department
of Homeland Security in 2003?

On the other hand, this sort of legislation was first passed in 1803,
200 years prior to that! The city of Portsmouth, NH had suffered a
number of devastating fires and the Seventh Congress provided for the
merchants of Portsmouth, by waiving duties and tariffs on goods.

Waiving duties and tariffs is one thing. Rebuilding your business
because you failed to secure insurance is not why the government.

Not a new thing, huh?

Bad example.

Because, as you point out yourself, FEMA - like all government agencies -
**** up everything they're charged with doing.
I think that is true of *anything* that is mismanaged.

True, but governments (federal, state and local) are on the fast track
towards screwing everything up.

Are you making a case for the benefits of Anarchy?

Not anarchy but, personal responsibility.