(Nags Head Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
83,605 messages
Updated 4/25/2024 9:33:24 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Nags Head Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,260 messages
Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
lotowner
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
First Big Tax Increase
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 7:37:43 AM
|
Starting in August 2009, FEMA distributed new flood level maps across this country. What was the result. Homes previous in a no flood plain were now in a flood plain. Houses that are 25 feet above the new 526 number are now included without any elevation numbers. These houses would not be flooded even if the water spilled over the dam.
Was this a calculated move? Me thinks yes. All new flood premiums go to FEMA's empty coiffures. Why? To send to New Orleans and other places. The result, Votes. Stay tuned.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sorry to Disappoint
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 8:25:06 AM
|
your conspiracy theory, but this was going on well before August 2009. It's even been discussed here on the LM Forum numerous times. In fact, some of our local organizations have been active in trying to fight this, around the lake.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And BTW
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 8:27:33 AM
|
What is wrong with helping out NOLA or other US locations that have been hit by Mother Nature? Don't you think we owe that much, at least, to our citizens?
|
| Name: |
4691
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Owe?
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 8:41:38 AM
|
why do I owe anything to someone that builds at sea level? That's not without known risk. They should buy their own insurance to cover their potential financial losses; if they choose not to, that's their problem. At least it should be. The same goes for residential, business, or city.
|
Because they are American citizens who were subjected to a natural disaster over which they had no control. We owe disaster relief to ourselves as American citizens. Would you have them go homeless? Maybe you think they should have been left to die?
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We don't "owe" them
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 10:06:06 AM
|
Hound, it may be that as an act of charity or out of a sense of mutual obligation that we choose to help those impacted by natural disasters but I don't "owe" them anymore than they would owe me if my house were destroyed by a tornado. That is why I have insurance because I take personal responsibility for my own life and take reasonable, financially sound measures to protect myself.
I think the major problem I have with government enforced (i.e., at the point of a gun) charity of this type is that it promotes poor decisions because people come to believe that they will not be held responsible for their decisions and will always be bailed out. We need to strike a balance between proper and appropriate use of the people's money to alleviate suffering from a natural disaster and promoting foolish behavior.
And of course, no one wants to see them left to die but at the same time how, by always bailing them out from their stupid decisions, do we promote rational decision making? I don't know the answer to this one as I recognize that a certain percentage of the population will always make bad decisions. I do think that what we learned from welfare reform was that a greater number of people will, if forced, make better personal decisions if they don't have any other alternatives (i.e., government bailing them out).
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Owe?
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 10:12:49 AM
|
New Orleans is a very bad example to use as far as people who are affected by "mother nature". If YOU choose to live in an area that relies on pumps to keep dry - that is a very poor decision on YOUR part, and YOU should accept the liability that comes with it. If you live in an area prone to flooding - you had better have a hull underneath your home. As far as the deaths in N.O. - most of the people CHOSE to stay, then whine about the Government not helping them. Another example of the total lack of self-responsibility.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Flooding in LA
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 10:36:02 AM
|
The Corps of Engineers keeps the Mississippi running through New Orleans. HOWEVER, The Big Muddy wants to switch to the Atchafalaya River basin. The only thing that prevents this from happening is the “Old River Structure” (Also a Corps of Engineers project) near Simmsport, LA.
If you know anything about bayous, you know that they depend on flooding for their existence. When the rivers cannot carry the water forced into them (it's a gradient vs channel cross-section problem), the water is “stored” by flooding the bayous. The entire Mississippi Delta is one big bayou.
Flood waters entrapped in bayous undergo a velocity drop. When this happens, the competency of the flow is reduced to… uh… nothing, and the sediment load is dropped. This process builds flood plains. THEREFORE, if you build on a flood plain, you are building in a place where flooding is a significant part of its history.
So that folks could live in New Orleans… yea, everywhere along the Mississippi…the Corps of Engineers has engineered the river banks and tributaries (for flood control and navigation)… to wit, levees and dredging. I heard recently that the Corps of Engineers is being sued for the levee break which flooded New Orleans. Hmmmm… the flood plain dwellers have hit the lottery with that one.
Ah… back to the Atchafalaya. If the Mississippi ever gets through the Old River Structure, an overwhelming portion of its flow will make the right turn into the Atchafalaya Basin. Overwhelming is an understatement. The Old River Structure would be scoured away. Morgan City would disappear in the wall of water, as would Interstate 10, every highway bridge, railroad bridge, pipeline, waterline, gas line, etc between Simmsport and the Gulf of Mexico. Shipping below Simmsport will be nearly impossible. And New Orleans will be high and dry… uh… well, low and dry.
New Orleans flooding problem solved by Mother Nature herself.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We don't "owe" them
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 12:01:08 PM
|
While I don't disagree with you in principle, there are socio-economic factors that don't permit some people from making better decisions. I don't believe that we have to rebuild their individual houses, but I do think it is a reasonable use of money to build low income housing to allow them a place to live.
One of my observations is that if you get caught up in a large scale national disaster, you are basically screwed no matter what kind of insurance you have.
And I do think our government has an obligation to help its own citizens before we send millions of dollars to tsunami victims or foreign national disasters. Not give them a better life than they had, but to make provisions for emergency housing and food, and basic services.
|
| Name: |
Yankee06
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We don't "owe" them
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 12:42:05 PM
|
Owe?
-The federal government provided more than $75 billion in post Katrina relief. That's right, $75 billion. Then teh government provided another $45 billion in rebuiulding funds. That's right, $45 billion. Then of course, Brad and Angelina provided lots more.
-Where did it all go?
- The tricklkedown theory of economics in LA is heavily filtered and leaves the truely needy at teh bottom with dry lips.
-The post-Katrina national guilt trip was a true marvel of teh PC guilt club. Another $6 Billion of charitable giving flowed in.
-Now on the other hand, lets look at the Iowa floods of 2008. Huge distruction of property and dislocation of people. The Iowans took care of most of it by themselve. Why? In my assessment, because it took place in rural America not in urban America.
-Why we are a nation whose collective reasoning process is fundamentally based on PC guilt logic rather than simple logic totally escapes me.
- And why liberals can't understand the illogic of their logic, to me seems...well..illogical.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We don't "owe" them
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 12:42:41 PM
|
Yes, disaster relief is highly appropriate to relieve suffering. It is infinitely wiser, more charitable, and more justifiable than, say… global warming. We should provide emergency shelter, food, clothing, law enforcement. But no cash!
If they want to move back into the flood danger zone, then they should be required to attend a briefing on flooding, hurricanes, prediction, and probability. Folks have lived with hurricanes and flooding in the coastal Carolinas and Georgia for centuries without undue disaster. The low country people build FOR the flooding and hurricanes (first living floor above flood stage). They KNOW they can’t get insurance. They KNOW the risk, and they live with it.
Folks have been living in the bayous for over a century. They expect flooding and hurricanes. They KNOW they can’t get insurance. They KNOW the risk, and they live with it.
(See Feibleman, Peter S. et al, “The Bayous”, Time Life Books, Revised 1977, LOC 73-84544)
Revisit WHO in New Orleans got slammed. ‘nuff said.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
WRONG ...
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 1:23:30 PM
|
That entitlement mentality is EXACTLY one of the biggest problems in america ... that you can take risk and when it fails, you are entitles to the government (tax payers) bailing you out.
As it was already stated ... these people build knowing the risk. In most cases insurance companies will not insure because the risk is too high ... so if someone knowingly builds ... why on earth would the be "entitled" to be bailed out?
That is just totally wrong thinking. I am surprised even you said that Hound.
|
It would have been much less costly if we are going to spend tax payers money ... to just give each homeowner that had their house destroyed, $300,000 with the condition they can not build below sea level again.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We don't "owe" them
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 3:21:44 PM
|
I'm not sure what you mean by "who got slammed". Is this some reference to poor blacks who suffered devastating losses? Am I supposed to draw some conclusion that you don't support helping poor blacks? How about poor whites, can we help them?
I'm talking about people who were left homeless. So according to y'all, we should just leave them homeless and on the street? What about the hospitals that were destoryed? Just leave them too? Businesses?
In my book, y'all are just shameful. I've never seen such a greed driven group. Do you by-pass the Salvation Army kettle too?
|
| Name: |
lotowner
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sorry to Disappoint
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 3:33:32 PM
|
Hound
Why do you think that FEMA is suddenly redefining flood plains in this country? My brother in law is going through this same thing in Tennessee with his property.
FEMA, per comments below by forum members, doles out very small dollar amounts for floods on nout in Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, etc.compared to those on the Gulf Coast. Why is this? I think that it has been answered below.
As I said earlier, this is a new method of taxation that is not covered by the press. Again, this new tax is levied on those who always pay and inteneded to be given to those who always receive. The FEMA coffers are empty after the billions spent in Louisiana. These dollars generate votes for Democrats.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Charity vs Entitlement
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 4:11:57 PM
|
Hound, you don't know me. Let me inform you that we ring the bell for the Salvation Army. Go to the right place and you may pass right by me. Be sure to put your dollars in the kettle. Let me also tell you that we hand out food, and clothing, and free children’s books.
Charity is color blind… as does not seem to be the case with entitlement. I DO NOT owe my tax dollars to the indigent and to the scammers. I DO owe compassion to the innocent caught in violent acts of nature. Understand this: Charity is an obligation… entitlement is an affront!
You are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness… everything else… you earn.
Try to lay aside your cynicism when you read the postings.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You nailed it !!!
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 4:59:27 PM
|
There is nothing wrong with help when someone is hit with a disaster ... but what Hound initially said was they are "entitled" not should we help them and provide charitable support.
So Hound ... are you saying people are entitled to government help, providing new housing or building them a new house .... or are you saying we as american should help them with food and clothing for a period of time until they relocate or figure out how to get back on their feet.
No one is "entitled" to anything from other tax payers if they make a personal choice to live in a high risk area with no insurance. And please do not say they do not have a choice. That is part of the problem with the liberal socialists ... they believe that which keeps the poor down and where they are rather being given the opportunity to better themselves and break out of the cycle they are in.
Read about John Wesley Dobbs in Atlanta. Came from slavery to be very successful business man in Atlana. And was a "republican"
http://www.sweetauburn.us/jwdobbs.htm
URL: John Wesley Dobbs
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Point about JWD
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 5:08:23 PM
|
was that he did not feel "entitled" to anything and during the time would not have gotten it .... but it did not stop him and achieved great things.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Point about JWD
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 7:10:15 PM
|
You know, there are always those who are able to escape their background, but that is not the case for the vast majority.
But, yes, I am saying that our country should provide shelter, food and basic services for a period of time for those who are wiped out.
And I believe that something needs to be done about those who can't recover. I don't want them on the streets. We can sit and talk for days about those people and why it is that way and I doubt we would ever come to an agreement. Yes, it may be their fault for making bad choices to live in NOLA and to be unemployed and have no education and no insurance, but every society has these people. And I think that if it means using federal funds to build low/no income housing to eventually turn over to the city or state, then so be it.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sorry to Disappoint
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 7:17:40 PM
|
Can't follow your logic on how this equates to votes for Democrats. This defination has been going on for well over a year -- it's not a democratic construct. It was started under the Republican Administration.
If you don't want to pay the "tax" as you call it, then don't have a loan on your property. It's only a problem if you have a loan that will require you to get flood insurance. Or you can hire an engineering firm to submit a letter of map amendment which says that you are not in a flood plain.
This has been going on for quite some time. It's not plot.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Charity vs Entitlement
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 7:30:58 PM
|
Not to disrespect you if you ring bells for the Salvation Army. I know that some of the folks here do good charitable work.
I guess I just want a better America for Americans. I don't want to create a structure of "entitlements". We've all seen it before, and we know it doesn't work. But, I believe that when disaster strikes, we owe it to our citizens to sustain them for a period of time. Oh yeah, and I want to see the money go directly where it is needed, not through some bureaucracy of state and local government. I'm convinced government at the state and local levels is corrupt.
|
| Name: |
lotowner
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sorry to Disappoint
|
|
Date:
|
12/5/2009 8:18:37 PM
|
Hound
I will not pay this "tax" very long since I will be paying off the mortgage soon. That is not the issue. Some cannot pay off their mortgage and will be burdened by this "tax" unless they pay for a new elevation study.
The cost for the new elevation study can range from $300 to $1,200 and still not guarantee that FEMA will redefine the flood plan rating for the property in question.
You are mistaken that this has been going on for years. FEMA issued the new flood plan maps in August of 2009. This is not hear say. This is from a firm in Houston that specializes in elevation measurements and did my flood assessment in 2004.
Admit it. This is an innovative way of generating new funds and not be called a tax. People are beginning to recognize what is going on. As I have said earlier, this is not about Smith Lake only. Many are facing flood insurance payments that do not live close to a lake.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
WOW,
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 12:03:11 AM
|
one of the best posts I've seen on this forum, ever. Appropriate, timely, and directed with good aim.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
WOW, above post
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 12:05:19 AM
|
was a reply to MAJ USA RET's 4:11 PM post above.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
We disagree ... :)
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 6:23:04 AM
|
See, I believe it is because of the government, and the liberal mindset that the vast majority can not break out and therefore need to be cared for and helped, is exactly why the disadvantaged stay down and do not break out of the cycle. Some do need help ... but the broad brush approach keeps more down than helping them breakout.
I am not saying that there should not be assistance, but someone providing for the basic needs according to Maslow will not allow someone to achieve self actualization.
The other thing I believe is the reason you still see the strong family in the Asian culture and even in countries like Italy is because the family supports and cares for each other since the government does not. When a parent gets old the children take them in and care for them. That has been destroyed in the US.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hierarchy of Needs
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 9:12:30 AM
|
You are correct. Creation of, or increasing, entitlements simply creates or increases the entitlement culture. According to B.F. Skinner, “Behavior is a result of its consequences.” The consequence of entitlement is that the consuming culture dips into the largesse of the producing culture without having to make any effort. Free lunch is free lunch… day after day. Entitlement is a reward for indigence.
The producing culture regards breeding as a sacred blessing and contemplates the resources necessary to raise children in a wholesome family environment. Fatherhood is an obligation at conception.
The consuming culture breeds indiscriminately, regardless of the lack of resources, because the government (funded by the producing culture) will also fee the offspring. Fatherhood carries no special obligation.
In the case of New Orleans, the members of the producing culture will rebuild. Homeowners and businesses deserve grants or interest free loans. That much of New Orleans will rise out of her ashes… ummm… silt. Industry and perseverance must be rewarded.
However, in the case of the New Orleans entitlement class, they looked first to government to save them. When the municipal and state government did not, because of gross incompetence and neglect, they cried, “foul” and went after the federal government. [A constitutional note: The federal government may NOT enter a state for an emergency without the specific request of the governor of that state. Louisiana did not ask until it was too late. The surprised federal government, FEMA, threw money and resources at the problem… with reckless abandonment of good management and control.]
Now they want to find reason to sue any agency so that they can hit the lottery. The Corps of Engineers has become a nice plump target. The indigent (and their lawyers) will aggrandize themselves and the producing culture will pay the bill. There will be a fresh canvas on which to restart the squalor as widescreen TVs and Cadillacs move back onto the flood plains of New Orleans.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hierarchy of Needs
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 9:33:41 AM
|
While you are being "politically incorrect", you are also absolutely correct. Somewhere, somehow we need to draw a line in the sand, or the entitlement mentality will spiral completely out of control (if it hasn't already). My perception is that the current administration and Congress are trying desperately to strengthen that entitlement culture as a tool to continually stay in power - to develop a mass of voters who depend on their largess for survival.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hierarchy of Needs
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 10:37:53 AM
|
It is not the government's largesse... it is ours. The government is the conduit whereby funds are transferred from the accounts of the producing culture to the pockets of the consuming culture… after skimming off a significant amount to insure that the government stays in business.
Largesse is, perhaps not the right word as the connotation is for somewhat of a voluntary basis for giving.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hierarchy of Needs
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 10:56:15 AM
|
First, I disagree with your interpretation of Maslow. In my view, Maslow says that UNTIL your basic needs are met, you cannot rise to the next level. He doesn't say that an individual has to provide his own basic needs; just that those needs must be met.
While all of the comments about an "entitlement" culture are interesting, you haven't answered the fundamental question -- if you don't help these people who cannot recover, what will become of them? Under your construct, they will be out in the streets. Do you want your cities littered with the homeless? A large homeless population creates an even bigger need for entitlement, not to mention a bigger climate for crime and abuse. I understand that you find the lowest levels of society to be distasteful and that you want to punish them for being what they are...but seriously, are you saying that human life is so worthless? How does that square with basic Christian beliefs?
And I agree, there are cultures that believe in taking care of their own, through a family network. But, we no longer seem to have that culture. On our way to self actualization, we threw family obligations under the bus.
|
That is just an assumption of yours that if you do not provide then they have no where else to turn. I believe that is totally incorrect. There are non profits that in part are funded by government grants to assist those in need with job training and development. There are shelters and soup kitchens. But the individual needs to want to better themselves and be a contributor to society to break the cycle. Those that do not, why would you or do you feel it is governments responsibility to cover their needs. By doing that will never get them to change. It is sad, but tough love is sometimes the best to change behavior.
|
You haven't answered my question. Do you want to see them homeless and on the streets? Yes, there may be shelters and soup kitchens, but not nearly enough to support the need.
WW you are either incredibly blind or incredibly naive.
What kind of country, indeed, what kind of people are we if we are unwilling to help? I don't want to live in your world.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
But
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 2:28:15 PM
|
I guess the real question is this: At what point do we stop becoming a solution to the problem of the homeless and become a facilitator of the problem?
I don't think anyone yet on this forum has said they mind giving someone a hand when they have fallen. It appears that the issue is whether we must as a government-funded (meaning you and me) mandate, after giving a hand for them to stand on their own, then become a pair of crutches for the rest of their lives - or worse yet must carry them on our backs.
I participated in two "charity" events post-Katrina, both on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. On immediately after involved being part of a church group that carried three open trailer loads of essential supplies to Waveland, the other about a year later to help rebuild a room that had been irreparably damaged by flood waters in the Long Beach (maybe it was Pass Christian, don't remember for sure). Those folks were danmed ecstatic to get the supplies the first time (some never got unloaded to the holding area because they were taken straight from the trailer to the needy), but when we went back we found that life was returning to normal - wasn't normal but well on the way.
So what is the difference between the "rednecks" and self-described "river rats" in Mississippi and the folks in New Orleans? Seems that the ones in Mississippi were used to being self sufficient, and given the hand picked themselves up, shook the hand that assisted them, and carried on with life. There should be a lesson learned there.
So Hound, I would answer itt this way: They should be given a chance to make it on their own. If they don't, so be it. We just can't continue to be a part of the entitlement mentality problem. We as a country cannot afford to do otherwise.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Mr. Hodja
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 5:26:30 PM
|
It is very interesting that you experienced helping others on the Mississippi Gulf Coast and observed their desire to overcome terrible circumstances and move on to recover. As a resident of the Coast for many years before Katrina, I worked a great deal in New Orleans. The most disturbing thing to us was the media coverage in New Orleans that was so distorted that the nation formed an opinion that everyone affected by the storm simply sat down and waited to be served--the picture provided by TV.
Rarely was any mention made of the hundreds of thousands of hard working folks in Miss and LA who were picking themselves up and moving on. Interesting was the huge influx of Mexicans to New Orleans to clean up and start rebuilding--all while the "entitled" were laying up in a hotel room in Houston, ATL, or any number of other places for the following 2 to 4 years, at taxpayer expense.
The total collapse of the N.O. and La government's efforts to plan for the storm or execute any rescue effort should have led to criminal charges. The glaring differences between the planning and rescue efforts of South Mississippi and New Orleans should be studied some day. Remember Katrina hit Mississippi in Bay St. Louis with a 32 foot tide (waves on top of that). Forty miles to the east we had a 21 foot tide. New Orleans to the west of the storm was flooded by much less water (9 to 3 feet)and no waves in all but St. Bernard Parrish.
|
I'm not suggesting help becoming an on-going hand out -- obviously that doesn't work. But, what I'm saying is use federal funds to build housing for them to have a place to live. Then if they go to soup kitchens to eat or whatever so be it. I just don't want them in the street.
And for a time, when there is a natural disaster, I want the government to provide shelter, housing and basic services for a period of time to allow people to get back on their feet.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
But
|
|
Date:
|
12/6/2009 5:43:27 PM
|
Permanent housing? Wouldn't agree with that. The second time I went to the Coast the family we were helping was partly in their house, partly in a FEMA trailer and couldn't wait for the room to get finished (by the way they all worked but couldn't afford to rebuild on their own -- a single Mom, married daughter and son-in-law with a baby, and another son).
I have no problem with the FEMA trailer concept because my wife and I tried living in a travel trailer when I attended SOS at Maxwell in 1974....believe me, there is significant reason to NOT make that a permanent situation..:>).
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
But
|
|
Date:
|
12/7/2009 12:44:14 PM
|
RE: Hound "But" 12/6/2009 5:27:54 PM
So we agree. Dssater relief is a good thing. Long term entitlement is a bad thing.
Good!
I will give anyone a hand out of a ditch. But, I don't want to find them there again.
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
North Carolina Coast
»
Nags Head
Login
|
Home
