Pages: 1 2
Good of you to bring this up, but I predict this thread will die an untimely death due to lack of anyone wanting to debate it.lowing wrote:
http://www.nbc15online.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=b8619bb7-adfd-4c09-b59c-9df40291edd4
By their own admittance, why should they? Sounds familiar in regards to free govt. handouts to people who will not help themselves.
A feel good story for all you liberals out there.
Out of an affected population of how many? And this is in three years since the hurricane hit. I wouldn't say that is an alarming figure.Since Katrina hit the Gulf Coast nearly three years ago, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Mississippi has charged more than 275 people with FEMA fraud.
That is only in one state; Texas received many times the number of refugees. The crime rate in Houston has still not recovered from the influx of refugees from New Orleans.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Out of an affected population of how many? And this is in three years since the hurricane hit. I wouldn't say that is an alarming figure.Since Katrina hit the Gulf Coast nearly three years ago, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Mississippi has charged more than 275 people with FEMA fraud.
Thousands of applicants for federal emergency relief money after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita used duplicate or invalid Social Security numbers or bogus addresses, suggesting that the $2.3 billion program was a victim of extensive fraud, a Congressional auditor will report Monday.
The examination of the so-called Expedited Assistance program determined that the Federal Emergency Management Agency failed to take even the most basic steps to confirm the identifies of about 1.4 million people who sought expedited cash assistance, leaving the program vulnerable to the "significant fraud and abuse," the Government Accountability Office intends to report.
The auditors did not try to estimate the total dollar amount of fraudulent claims. But the report says that FEMA itself had found that 900,000 of the 2.5 million applications for all forms of individual assistance were "potential duplicates."
Last edited by imortal (2008-06-10 20:17:55)
Also, it has yet to become a crime to sponge off of the tax payer indefinitelyimortal wrote:
That is only in one state; Texas received many times the number of refugees. The crime rate in Houston has still not recovered from the influx of refugees from New Orleans.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Out of an affected population of how many? And this is in three years since the hurricane hit. I wouldn't say that is an alarming figure.Since Katrina hit the Gulf Coast nearly three years ago, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Mississippi has charged more than 275 people with FEMA fraud.
Also, that is only the people they have caught up with yet. In that state.
Nope I am sure the illegal aliens have contributed immensely to the crime rateGod Save the Queen wrote:
because houston was a mecca for law abiding citizens before katrina?
Never said it was, but it is still something impressive to see the crime rate triple inside a month, and stay there; it has been going down a bit at a time, but the increase is very squarely pegged at the arrival of the refugees.God Save the Queen wrote:
because houston was a mecca for law abiding citizens before katrina?
The 40's Germans would just take them to the pound...SEREMAKER wrote:
they should have known ........ its like a stray animal, once you feed it and it will keep coming back and soon it won't leave
Partisan nonsense FTW!sergeriver wrote:
Lowing at his best.
This is what I don't get about certain 'right-wing types'...lowing wrote:
http://www.nbc15online.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=b8619bb7-adfd-4c09-b59c-9df40291edd4
By their own admittance, why should they? Sounds familiar in regards to free govt. handouts to people who will not help themselves.
A feel good story for all you liberals out there.
How bout a whole country like................The kingdom of the Netherlands? Don't hear much about floods there, so i wonder if their flood defences are up to scratch.......CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
oh...and who builds a city under the water line.
FEMA was at fault for sure (slow to respond)Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Lowing, you seem to have missed a few major points here.
1. This is FEMA, not welfare.
2. The head of FEMA was appointed by Bush.
3. This all began under a Republican controlled government.
4. There were also many businesses that filed fraudulent claims, trying to score some of that taxpayer cash.
Kind of convenient that you forgot to mention these points before laying your typical tirade about liberals being the root of all our problems.
You can't let facts get in the way of a good rant.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Lowing, you seem to have missed a few major points here.
1. This is FEMA, not welfare.
2. The head of FEMA was appointed by Bush.
3. This all began under a Republican controlled government.
4. There were also many businesses that filed fraudulent claims, trying to score some of that taxpayer cash.
Kind of convenient that you forgot to mention these points before laying your typical tirade about liberals being the root of all our problems.
Don't side step the argument. I totally agree that NO's government didn't do what they could have, but that isn't what Lowing was ranting about. He's ranting about the money being paid to these people. Also, even if NO's government had done more to evacuate people, that still wouldn't change the fact that they were displaced and this money would still be spent.CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
FEMA was at fault for sure (slow to respond)Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Lowing, you seem to have missed a few major points here.
1. This is FEMA, not welfare.
2. The head of FEMA was appointed by Bush.
3. This all began under a Republican controlled government.
4. There were also many businesses that filed fraudulent claims, trying to score some of that taxpayer cash.
Kind of convenient that you forgot to mention these points before laying your typical tirade about liberals being the root of all our problems.
but mayor Ray 'chocolate' Naggin and that pathetic Governor screwed the pooch way worse. How many school busses were sitting in their yards that could have been used to get people out of the city? Naggin did not mobilize them. I'd argue that the Democrat controlled infrastructure at the local level should have done way way more since they were on the ground and essentially first responders in this. Instead, the governor was cowering under a desk. did she mobilize the national guard to ensure an orderly evacuation?
don't put this all on the republicans, please.
Last edited by Agent_Dung_Bomb (2008-06-11 09:38:09)
Take a look at the levee system in Holland and the one that was protecting New Orleans. The levee near Lake Pontchitrain looked to me like it couldn't hold even before the flood - in fact it was built over 20-30 years ago if i read that right. These things have to be extremely well maintained. Further, in this case, they should have been built alot better than they had been.m3thod wrote:
How bout a whole country like................The kingdom of the Netherlands? Don't hear much about floods there, so i wonder if their flood defences are up to scratch.......CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
oh...and who builds a city under the water line.
not side stepping the argument. when i read your response it sounded to me like 'blame bush'. i agree with you that money should be spent on displaced people but the way it was handled was pathetic. instead of blank check, they should have issued something akin to food stamps that can be used for food, diapers, hotel rooms, etc. instead, they had $2000 credit card without any oversight. i'm not sure whether this was a republican or democrat gaff.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Don't side step the argument. I totally agree that NO's government didn't do what they could have, but that isn't what Lowing was ranting about. He's ranting about the money being paid to these people. Also, even if NO's government had done more to evacuate people, that still wouldn't change the fact that they were displaced and this money would still be spent.CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
FEMA was at fault for sure (slow to respond)Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Lowing, you seem to have missed a few major points here.
1. This is FEMA, not welfare.
2. The head of FEMA was appointed by Bush.
3. This all began under a Republican controlled government.
4. There were also many businesses that filed fraudulent claims, trying to score some of that taxpayer cash.
Kind of convenient that you forgot to mention these points before laying your typical tirade about liberals being the root of all our problems.
but mayor Ray 'chocolate' Naggin and that pathetic Governor screwed the pooch way worse. How many school busses were sitting in their yards that could have been used to get people out of the city? Naggin did not mobilize them. I'd argue that the Democrat controlled infrastructure at the local level should have done way way more since they were on the ground and essentially first responders in this. Instead, the governor was cowering under a desk. did she mobilize the national guard to ensure an orderly evacuation?
don't put this all on the republicans, please.
Hip-hop doesn't exactly promote a 'work hard and succeed in life through honest efforts' type of message either and must be looked at as a possible factor. The image of the 'gangsta' who pimps out women, gets what he wants by nefarious means and spends the majority of his time 'kickin it in the club' is something that is actually idolised and looked up to in contemporary African American popular culture.CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
we can also take a step back and look at why socially these people acted the way they did. that's actually a more interesting thread. why do people who are given hand outs all their lives behave in such a way that they cannot take care of themselves? is it lack of opportunity? i am unsure of this since there are many stories of poor inner city youth growing up and starting businesses, running companies, becoming successful as PART of society. Actually i would argue that those who are not integrating into society are the problem. I would argue that they themselves are the ones keeping them 'down' and holding them back. The social leaders (Jesse 'rainbow' Jackson and Al Sharpton) make money off of these people's suffering and are basically saying it's ok to do nothing - you are owed this because of 400 years of slavery. This kind of talk is counter productive because it just divides the nation. at the core, people want to have families and succeed. However, the 'guilt' mentality that Sharpton/Jackson and many progressives from the 60s are pushing is really just holding them back from these aspirations. i don't see that as a solution. Rather, i would like to see more job training, less hand-outs but more hand-ups (work for the $$$ even if it is public works), fixing the breakdown of the nuclear family, work with civic leaders to get progress instead of division going, etc.
Exactly! There are many things that the movie and music industry can do to help change perceptions of what should be acceptable behavior. Many movies these days paint the broken home as 'normal'. it is not 'normal'. if people from broken home would be asked if they would rather have both parents, i'm sure they would say yes (if both were not violent drunks and so on, etc). Movies and Music play a powerful influence on young people's aspirations.Braddock wrote:
Hip-hop doesn't exactly promote a 'work hard and succeed in life through honest efforts' type of message either and must be looked at as a possible factor. The image of the 'gangsta' who pimps out women, gets what he wants by nefarious means and spends the majority of his time 'kickin it in the club' is something that is actually idolised and looked up to in contemporary African American popular culture.
Pages: 1 2