Correlation between the hurricanes's costs and HC insurance.....

This moron is saying I should be paying a portion of the home owners insurance for those who chose to live in the path of hurricanes.


If you had more brain cells than my parakeet, you'd know that you ARE paying for those home owners' insurance..........(what a moronic :asshole: LOL)
 
This moron is saying I should be paying a portion of the home owners insurance for those who chose to live in the path of hurricanes.


If you had more brain cells than my parakeet, you'd know that you ARE paying for those home owners' insurance..........(what a moronic :asshole: LOL)

You don't understand how insurance works do you?
 
This moron is saying I should be paying a portion of the home owners insurance for those who chose to live in the path of hurricanes.


If you had more brain cells than my parakeet, you'd know that you ARE paying for those home owners' insurance..........(what a moronic :asshole: LOL)

You don't understand how insurance works do you?

That one is the poster child for stupid goddamn.

I think stupid is too smart for him
 
Last edited:
I'm good with my tax dollars being used to help people after a natural disaster. Are you suggesting I shouldn't be, nat4900?
 
Time for both Florida and Texas to add a State income tax that is just the residence paying for their own hurricane destruction.... near all other States have income taxes and these two States do not....maybe they should fund in the least, most of their destruction and rebuilding costs for future catastrophes by adding a 1% or 2% state income tax, and keep this set aside in a kitty?

the Fed will still come in and help, but the burden will not be mostly on the Fed Gvt...
What the hell do state income taxes have to do with anything? The DRF is appropriated by the FEDERAL government (thanks to the Stafford Act) out of general funds and those funds comes from citizens of the STATES.

Yes the DRF is rampantly abused by governors since they have every incentive to try to convince FEMA into declaring anything that happens in their states as a NATIONAL disaster since once it's national the federal government foots a large portion of the bill via the DRF but that fact has nothing to do with how the States choose to fund their own government operations, if you want to get rid of the DRF that's a fine idea but the funding for it needs to go back directly to all the states on a proportional basis, after all it's the citizenry of the states that's paying for it already (and the states that use it most are some of the most heavily populated and economically developed (e.g. Texas, California and Florida ) and thus their citizens and business already contribute the most.

Or do you just have some kind of weird obsession with income taxes and can't handle the fact that some states get by just fine without having to implement that idiotic form of taxation on their citizens?
Wow! That's some long dissertation for something I never said NightFox! ;)
Er..umm... You suggested Texas and Florida add a state income tax to pay for Hurricane relief to reduce reliance on the DRF, right?

I am suggesting, that the States that are PRONE to Natural Disasters, such as Texas and Florida find a way to pay for most of their disaster costs and the federal government come in and help them...as the law was meant to do.
Are you aware that the money in the DRF comes from citizens in those States? and that the purpose of the DRF was to aid States during disasters of a national scale? and that the States themselves do shoulder part of the burden even under national disasters? The problem isn't with the funding in States that are subject to true national disaster scale events the problem is the DRF is abused and gets raided to pay for things that should be funded at the State level, 29 States are net takers from the DRF while 21 + the DoC are net payers.

The problem is that the law is written in a way that the DRF is subject to rampant abuse by governors and thus it cannot meet its original purpose (which was a worthy one) of providing aid in truly national scale disaster situations without pulling in excessive appropriations (which is an opportunity cost that just keeps growing).



Adding a state income tax, could be a way for Texans and Floridians to be more prepared for the costs of rebuilding entire communities or entire states, and the federal govt would still be the partner the ACT requires.
Adding a state income tax is IDIOTIC since it's the most inefficient, most subject to corruption and the most invasive form of taxation ever invented by man. It wastes a enormous amount of man hours to file, process and enforce, it is extremely prone to special interest favoritism and it forces citizens to divulge the details of their income to government which is none of the governments business in the first place.

Income taxes need to be eliminated not expanded, if you had suggested property or consumption tax expansion you might have some grounds but suggesting adding income taxes just makes your proposition nonsense.
 

Forum List

Back
Top