Welcome to PatsFans.com

Free Market Fans: Disaster Relief?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatsFanInVa, Nov 18, 2011.

  1. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    I know there's a minority who like the idea that global warming has nothing to do with greenhouse gases, and a tiny minority of actual climatologists who want to make their name as deniers. Okay.

    But even the deniers of human activity contributing to global warming accept that it's happening.

    Here's the latest scary stuff for the future owing to global warming:

    Science panel: Get ready for extreme weather - Yahoo! News

    Same old same old: More extreme weather events, both in terms of the extent of extremes, and in terms of the frequency of such events.

    One spokesman says governments aren't prepared for such events. Well, that brings up our other oft-repeated complaint around here: Whatever the size of the government, it's too big. Whatever the extent of the government's involvement, it's too much.

    What is the profit motive for disaster relief, preparedness, and -- dare we think it -- disaster prevention, particularly where disaster strikes the developing world or the third world -- i.e., poor folks?

    How can the private sector address this problem?

    Thanks.

    PFnV
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2011
  2. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Home Depot and Lowes make a mint off Disaster Preparedness... Plenty of profit motive, not to mention generator makers, etc... There is an entire market dedicated to it.

    The government did not help in Katrina.

    I think the Hurricane Service is valuable, but I also think State Governments would have no issue paying a subscription fee to a private company to perform the same service. They would probably do it cheaper and better.

    Look, we have no issue using private companies for security and mltary functions of our government, why not try other things?

    I mean think about it.

    There is one thing our Constitution says our government should, and that's have a military... And we outsource a lot of that. The Constitution DOES NOT authorize so many other things, that the mere mention of privatizing gets the liberals all in a tizzy.

    Private corporations operating under fair competition will improve value for the people by lowering the cost, and improve the service. Fact.
     
  3. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Is there an example of third world countries taking care of their poor after a disaster?

    Government provided service and relief doesn't look like a winner in Haiti. They STILL have roaming nomads, and their island is still in ruins, becuase they are waiting for a government to do everything for themselves.

    In America, we mobilize our tree cutters, and waste removal companies, and the people who want to restore their homes the fastest pay people to help them restore it, and the entire area is restored faster than any other areas in the World.

    The Free Market can clean up a disaster faster than any other system you can imagine.

    Perhaps Solyndra can get into the Disasater recovery industry so we can funnel billion to them to help People after a disaster and then watch them bail on us after they took out money.

    THAT is what people like you don't understand. YOU Can't create something that isn't corrupt. Money corrupts, and in DC is where you get it. If you rely on Corrupt people spending money that they didn't earn, you will get Solyndra's.

    In the Free Market, people have to work hard to achieve that business, it's more efficient, and less corrupt.

    As long as you keep turning to governmnt to buy and sell things, pick winners and lossers, we all will lose, prices will go up.

    There is SOOOOO much evidence of governments playing favorites, corruption, cronyism, etc... how do you still have faith that once you elect a certain set of people, things will be better???

    That blows my mind, not only has corruption exploded along the rise of the size of government, but historically in nearly all governments prior, reliance on a central body time and time again leads to corruption, and inequality amoungst the populace.

    It's so obvious, the fact that liberals still look to this machine of ineffectiveness, corruption, and favoritism BLOWS MY FREAKING MIND.
     
  4. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,203
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +579 / 6 / -2


    :rolleyes:

    1234
     
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,974
    Likes Received:
    198
    Ratings:
    +428 / 12 / -26

    Not sure you made your point, as a volunteer for the Red Cross and a part of the Habitat for Humanity Disaster Response team, the role of the government is minimal in comparison to the role of the volunteer agencies..

    What happens after the initial search and rescue stuff, is that most of the recovery is done by voluntary agencies... FEMA is there to hand out grants to folks who need it. After that everything is pretty much done by volunteer agencies... after an emergency there is a a response by the "Volunteer Organizations Active in Disaster"...these organizations include many different groups, most of which are faith based.

    These VOAD groups do most of the grunt work..

    National Members

    Post Katrina George made all of these organizations eligible for reimbursement, even if they were subsidized through their local churches..

    BTW the Government was slow to respond, but they did help in Katrina and are still there making the levees better than they were.. should not speak in absolutes.

    Good effort on Solyndra, but it has no context in this conversation..
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2011
  6. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,368
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +719 / 2 / -9

    How can we turn "poor folks" into "rich folks"

    Answer
    Make the rich folks give their money to the poor folks

    Then the poor folks will be the rich folks, what then?

    Answer
    Kill the bastards
     
  7. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Thank you for agreeing with me? You show that government has no place other than the initial search and rescue, after that volunteer organizations do a better job.

    I agree... Good job.

    P.S. FEMA giving away money does nothing but inflate the costs and artificially raise prices for services needed in those times, interfering with the free market, which will drive more than needed resources to an area, making other areas susceptible to their own inability to recover from disaster.
     
  8. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,974
    Likes Received:
    198
    Ratings:
    +428 / 12 / -26

    Actually not FEMA provides money to folks who need help in recovering, most is in the form of loans.. they also serve as a coordinating agency.

    Thanks for acknowledging my knowledge as opposed to what many think happens.. the government guides the effort, but most is done by VOAD Groups who are then eligible for reimbursement as set up by George Bush.. which was an incredibly stupid ideas, and was intended to pander to the religious clientel.
     
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,929
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12

    Well the new draft of IPCC has been leaked. They are backing off their past predictions of extreme weather. This is a result of the recent research AND the recent satellite measurements that show the world is not warming currently. These measurements are well below previous predictions of what the temps 'should' be now.

    The IPCC is saying that Natural factors will dominate the climate for the next 20-30 years.

    This of course will not stop the Bureaucrats/Thieves at the UN from proceeding with their plans to extort money from industrialized counties.

    The GWPF Responds To New IPCC Report | Watts Up With That?

    From the IPCC preliminary report:


    The OP shows how the (technically illiterate) MSM manipulates the scientifically illiterate citizens with their nonsense scare mongering.
     
  10. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    Hey, I know! Let's stop cherry picking after the sentence we like!

    IPCC says...

    We're talking here about how much divergence is due to emissions in different time frames. There's less additional uncertainty in the 20-30 year range, and more thereafter. We are not saying "Hey look! 13's right and nothing bad will happen because of emissions!"

     
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,203
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +579 / 6 / -2

    The IPCC. :rolleyes:
     
  12. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    This is the sort of thing that might be posted by a very stupid person, because it has no content. Since you are a smart person, I am not saying you are stupid. You did however post a very stupid thing.

    By the way, the picture of the girl is mildly amusing, but didn't really make the fail response much smarter.
     
  13. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,929
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12



    The IPCC has to serve their bureaucratic masters to secure their funding $$$$ Tens of billions have been spent on this program to redistribute $$$$ based on flawed computer models.

    It is hard to discuss this topic intelligently with people who are incapable of understanding the issues.
     
  14. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,974
    Likes Received:
    198
    Ratings:
    +428 / 12 / -26

    Belittling a poster is a great way to show others what the expectations are on this board..

    Your choice of words is poor..

    Tens of billions have been spent?? Source??? As best as can be told last year somewhere between 3 & 13 million was spent, but hysteria works much better..
     
  15. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    To McGraw's defense that Home Depot makes a mint off disasters, does that mean they make money giving away new home fixit materials? If not, do you think they make a mint as a result of money that came through gubmit coffers (or in Darryl's formulation, volunteer org coffers?)

    As to the dividing line, here's a DHS list about as long as your arm of the federal responses just to Katrina:

    DHS | The First Year After Hurricane Katrina: What the Federal Government Did

    $16 billion from HUD programs alone, not exactly chicken sh1t. (Though I'm sure the non-profit sector exceeded direct federal aid. However: If there's no gubmit taxing everybody, there's no tax-break for giving to the non-profit... and charitable giving declines.)

    Of course, that effect could only be present because we have taxes at all; it might be that voluntary giving has nothing to do with how taxable a charitable donation is. Writers from the period preceding government interventions, both direct and indirect, do not paint a pretty picture of this arrangement, however.

    One more effect of Katrina: The government capped claims for Katrina-related damage, essentially defraying insurance companies' bad bets by punishing their premium-payers. They were too little to not fail, evidently. The insurance companies, by contrast, were "too big to fail," an invoking of the principle in a disaster setting that foreshadowed the corporate bridge-loans the gubmit pushed beginning in 08. The difference is, with Katrina, they just plain stole money from the premium payer and gave it to the company, by removing the actual product from the transaction (i.e., you give them money to cover you, then they don't.)

    So while we don't have to calculate that transfer of wealth from the victims of the disaster to the corporations (i.e., it wasn't funded by all taxpayers,) it was, perversely, a driver of lower costs to the insurers, but also a driver of lower demand in terms of disaster response. To the extent that the Bush Administration did make up the difference directly, this was a taxpayer-funded corporate giveaway.

    The last attempt to shore up the FEMA fund by $3.6 billion was fought tooth and nail by the pubbies as a terrible and "unsustainable" infusion into a fund that "never made a penny", as if it were supposed to be a profit-making venture. So, the point is well-taken: we are currently more reliant on voluntary orgs than the government for disaster relief and recovery.

    Yet whatever amount the government does have on hand to respond with is, by definition, "too much" (other responders' reads, not yours, Darryl.)

    And the IPCC -- talking much more about the developing world than about us -- is saying governments are unprepared for an escalation in the type of disaster aid we're talking about.

    So I understand, McGraw, that Home Depot makes money when a charity or when the government gives a poor person money to pay for a contractor to fix the place up after the big storm. I understand that others can buy the poor person's ruined house for pennies -- the sole asset still owned by that family which has declined in income -- and has money to fix it up & re-sell it.

    What I don't understand is what happens in a poorer country.

    What's the profit motive to pour money into the pockets of the poor?

    Or are we just saying that the system still works when someone goes from penury to homeless penury, because if their dwelling is worth anything, someone else turns a buck on it?

    Doesn't seem to me that this alleviates suffering. It's just the coincidental making of another buck by somebody not affected by the disaster, unless somebody is helping the person who's lost everything.

    So who has a profit motive to give that money away, just for starters?

    PFnV
     
  16. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    Yeah, something has blown your freaking mind.

    If you're pointing to gubmit as the source of all corruption, particularly in this context, have a look at a Carl Hiassen book or two... he's a fan of pointing at all the kinds of corruption he can find, public or private, and bonus, he's a hilarious writer. The landscape of South Florida after Hurricane Andrew is the setting for one book, I believe it's called Stormy Weather. Corrupt contractors everywhere. They're not gubmit agents, they're pure and simple grifters. They take the check then don't put the roof on. They sell you mobile homes with no tie-downs. Etcetera. He's onto these types in all his books, but this one is specifically about disaster settings.

    Yeah something has blown your mind. You clearly believe that corruption doesn't exist in private sector transactions... caveat emptor takes care of that, right? Once you give him the money he doesn't have to give you the roof, because you're supposed to "beware."

    So can the "people like you" and "liberals believe" and "government never works boo hoo" talk, and do some work on your responses. It's boring to just read canned cliches over and over again.

    PFnV
     
  17. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,929
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12




    Not belittling anyone, just stating a fact. The same fact would apply to many here. Unfortunately it applys to many of the lawyer in congress who have no scientific background and are only interested in $$$ and power.

    When one only issues calls to authority to defend their beliefs and can't comment on the particulars of the issue that is the conclusion.
     
  18. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Private Corruption doesn't effect me... They don't take money from me against my will, and if they fail or fall due too corruption, they are out of business, and no more.

    Public Corruption damages our country in all facets.

    There is no competition.

    Corporations cheat, lie and steal, and you can stop buying their products.
     
  19. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,974
    Likes Received:
    198
    Ratings:
    +428 / 12 / -26

    You missed the debunked comments you made about tens of billions spent..
     
  20. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,675
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ratings:
    +611 / 7 / -7

    :cool: Until the next time the next corporation does it.

    Hell, you can rig it so that people "freely choose" to get lower returns on investments -- as a group -- rather than get higher returns through lower fees and professional investment management. You can sell them hyperactive access to markets, and you can even get a competitive edge by giving them more opportunities to roll the dice because they just have to gamble using their i-phones. And every time they roll the dice, you get a cut, win, lose, or draw. You can get people to remember that one time they made a bunch on XYZ stock, and forget that 2000 times they lost money on the trade plus the commission. anything to keep out collective action, even when it is in any given player's interest, taken as a group. Why? We don't want to be taken as a group. We want to be taken individually, even if we are taken for more. (Because "I am special and different.")

    And all that stuff mentioned above is legal.

    Now, think about one's option when the roof is gone, there's a convenient roofing company coming through the neighborhood, and you can either write a check or not write a check... while your house is still being pumped dry of the flood water in the first place. Same thing with the guy pulling out the carpets, the guy pumping out the water, etc.

    Yeah, private sector contractors after a hurricane are pristine models of virtue, ask anybody.

    After all, if they just never put the roof on, they'll lose the competition and what comfort will that $10,000 check from 20 people be? Why, they'll get known as a bad organization that didn't do a good job!!!

    You're such a shrewd and cynical observer of government corruption that you can find it just by the mention of the word "public" or the word "government," and all evidence on one side or the other of the ledger is just commentary. Your mind is made up a priori in each case.

    Yet you show all the perspicacity of a six-month-old child when it comes to the corruption that thrives in the very system you believe is so pristine and perfect, our so familiar market-driven capitalism.

    Bear in mind we're all capitalists here, myself included. But christ, aren't you being a tad naive about the almighty market?

    PFnV
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>