Thanks for your input!

I have always been a SURVIVOR fan and a hundred years ago I recall a contestant getting stung by something they encountered in the water and another contestant urinated on the area to apparently disinfect it. My guess is there’s probably some positive effects with the use of urine but just to sit down and enjoy a good, warm glass of fresh piss, no thank you, I would much rather have a cold glass of Coca Cola OR take me to my happy place, a refreshingly cold Michelob Ultra in a long neck bottle!

Phart, moving is not an option. Even when insurance is involved.
I’m sure you worked in the “real world” and that made you very knowledgeable. Me? I just worked in a hospital doing clerical work. Except when I spent 7 days living in the hospital, on call 24 hrs a day during hurricanes. Listening to patients tell me how they reached that point in their lives, or offered some limited comfort to a family member when a loved one passed away or was given a bad diagnosis.
You have to understand, Phart, that I’m 73 yrs young and, while I’m recently separated from WOODY, he and all the other members of a very extended family that includes those members that go all the way to Connecticut, New York, and the Northeast, not to mention Argentina, keep me informed of anything I miss. I’m very well read and, I believe, I can match my humble life experiences with yours.

Bet they don’t supply the money. And, you think a poor state like Alabama can help its people like a rich state like Texas or Florida?
One of the things FEMA does is bring basic mobile homes as temporary shelters for those left homeless. Those are brought from all over the country. Some are stored ready for the next natural catastrophe. You really think Alabama, Luisiana, South Carolina, Kansas and all those other states with limited funds will be able to do that?
FEMA was created exactly for that reason. The power of the Federal government with its ability to stand behind the purchases needed to help everyone no matter where they live was and is the main reason.
Do you not believe that a bipartisan Congress, Republican and Democrat, saw the need to act?
Look, if eliminating FEMA will accomplish something better, I’m all for it, but, right now, all I see is a complicated effort to keep the national debt down so the Clown’s tax breaks for the top 1 % won’t be noticed. And if that’s not enough for you then tell me, when was the last time your state paid for a major interstate or a bridge across a major waterway without help from the Feds?
Eliminating that would hurt YOUR LIFE, but, helping out those poor unfortunates who, by no fault of their own, are suffering a life changing catastrophe, oh, no, let someone else do/pay for it.
Way to go.

ditto, it is really a better idea. it gives the people of the state affected more control over the money. voters can see how the money is spent and vote accordingly. such as a governor allowing a house to be repaired a 12th time at a cost of 80,000 dollars ,whereas if the house had been moved a mile down the road to higher ground the 3rd time it was damaged ,would have been fixed and done. you would vote that person out.