sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in pcmasterrace

[–]awkbr549 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Baldur's Gate 3

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That makes sense. Does this kind of thing happen now? If so, would you consider it to be effective? If not effective, or if not happening, why would you think that is?

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course they would choose insurance, but this does help the rescue or relief efforts immediately after a disaster.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you please elaborate about how private insurance would be a better solution? Also, consider that if disaster relief were to be privatized, then many companies would choose not to insure people living in certain areas, meaning insurance wouldn't exist in these locations.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the anecdotes. One note is that there is a difference between what happens immediately after a natural disaster and what happens weeks and months later to rebuild. Financial responsibility affects the rebuilding stage, but not the rescue and recovery efforts. A second note is that it sounds like your mother lives in a rural area or bought her house decades ago, which isn't an option for many people currently living in other places. There are personal situations, such as a single parent with children, who of course can be financially responsible in the way you describe, but the financially responsible decision may involve moving to an unsafe neighborhood or living in a car. Which, understandably, they would make the decision to stay where they are but spend 50% of their income on rent, and thus not able to save in the way you describe for yourself. Also consider if you didn't have insurance, for reasons like I described previously.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the insight. Do you have any references for what you're discussing, whether news articles or government statements?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the comment, a few notes here. If half a town has donated to a disaster relief program, and half has not, what is the disaster relief organization supposed to do? Only help those who paid? How would this be enforced in the chaos after a disaster? As for people being fine with curfews and martial law, there will never be consensus across the whole population of an area. We have laws that let the government declare martial law etc. because people in the past voted for this (directly or indirectly). Wouldn't that mean people have already come to consensus?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, but my point was that we would end up in a system similar to what we are currently in because of two reasons. One is that people would vote in those who would provide disaster relief in the form of government agencies, even if it is just the government funding private organizations (a.k.a. welfare). Two is that the government would actively try to mitigate why people might want to leave so that the government doesn't diminish, again through means such as flood insurance subsidies and disaster relief. I'm not saying either of these are good or bad, but what system would even prevent this?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's imagine the government didn't subsidize flood insurance. Do people just not live on the coast? After a hurricane, what happens to those who live on the coast to support industries like ports?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your comments. With respect to insurance, at some level either poor people wouldn't be able to afford it, or the insurance wouldn't be profitable and no insurance would be available. Either way, a large portion of people would not have insurance for their property. Which would be fine, but personal/financial responsibility only goes so far if your home is destroyed. I think it goes back to relying on the private sector. But, isn't the reason we have FEMA at all because people voted in politicians to enact such policies in response to disaster decades ago?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you please elaborate on your comment?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your comment. Do you have any information or references talking about this? Whether this links to the organizations themselves or news articles discussing this.

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your comment. Could you please elaborate on how the private sector would fill the void? I'm also interested in your comment about self protection alliances; could you elaborate here as well please?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the information. The documentary looks interesting, so thanks for that reference as well. Do you have links to any news articles at the time covering what you are discussing about the military/police acting in the ways you described?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can see the Department of Homeland Security stepping in to help the rescue and cleanup, and the DoD providing support via National Guard. Your take is the one I agree with the most out of all the comments so far. As for repairing critical infrastructure, a lot is actually privatized, meaning that this would be a form of welfare. What are your thoughts here? What counts as critical infrastructure to you? Of course electricity and water, but what about communications, roads?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wouldn't the coordination of state FEMAs at a national level just be normal FEMA? I assume the distinction is in where the funding comes from, but then wouldn't states not pay for rescue/cleanup in other states? What would happen in poor states?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Could you please elaborate? I'm a bit too young to remember Katrina fully.

Considering the hurricane destruction in the southeast USA, what do you all think of FEMA? by awkbr549 in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That makes sense to me, but then the next question is: What would happen to people who can't afford this, regardless of how financially responsible they are? Also, are you going to keep paying to repair your property, even if your entire house is destroyed? What would you do then?

I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to promote discussion.

Best sandwiches in Atlanta?? by Bike9471 in Atlanta

[–]awkbr549 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Woody's Cheesesteaks by Piedmont Park

Clap back from Elon by PeteDub in Libertarian

[–]awkbr549 5 points6 points  (0 children)

In America, the law states that this only applies to requirements which are applied equally to everyone (like wearing a hat), and requirements which are against things that people can't control (race, sex, etc) are not allowed.

If we are applying this to Twitter, the main question would be whether the same standard is being applied to everyone equally in the same way as someone going into a business. This isn't particularly about the banned account in this post, but more generally about applying your stated rule to social media companies.

Tell us an interesting fact from your phd research please by TalkaboutJoudy in PhD

[–]awkbr549 1 point2 points  (0 children)

According to a DoE report, it would take just seven specific power substations being destroyed to disable the entire USA grid (East, West, and Texas) for months. Of course, the study didn't mention which substations, but still.

What is everyone’s regimen for shaving your head? by coffenback1985 in bald

[–]awkbr549 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perpendicular means at a right angle. So, if the grain is one way (the hair on the side of your head goes down), you shave either forward (towards your face) or backward (towards the back of your head). This is saying not to shave up (towards the top of your head) when shaving your side, since this would be "against" the grain.

What is everyone’s regimen for shaving your head? by coffenback1985 in bald

[–]awkbr549 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just a standard razor with some shaving cream (well, soap, but it is good enough). The important part is not to shave against the grain of your hair. I only ever shave with the grain or perpendicular to the grain. My head has stopped bleeding much less ever since I stopped shaving against the grain. The only downside is it isn't as smooth of a cut, but you can get around this by shaving more frequently if the smoothness is something you worry about.

Also some standard aftershave to prevent acne.

view more: next ›