Does this guy ever think through anything before opening his mouth? Is he even capable of thinking?
None of this behavior is new; the American people have been fully aware of this and a voting majority decided that he was the most qualified person for the job.
There's your mistake: the technocratic assumption that elections are job interviews selecting for the "most qualified" candidate.
That's one part, but not the only part. This thought experiment should make it clear: You're voting in an important election. One candidate is an incompetent and unqualified clown, the other is a highly competent and qualified Nazi. You hate Nazis. Who do you vote for?
Could eliminating it force states to strengthen their own disaster relief programs?
If that's the case, some potential benefits of this might be that states get more efficient with their overall budget (in order to support disaster relief initiatives). And maybe spurs more innovation in disaster relief tech/processes.
My questions are if this would have any repurcussions on EMAC membership and if it would increase politicization of aid between states. We've seen this with a number of conservative-leaning states pulling out of ERIC over flimsy political reasons.
How do you like them apples?
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/08/fema-direct-payments-state-...
California is the world's fifth largest economy. They will be fine.
[1] https://www.texastribune.org/2023/06/02/texas-environment-cl...
[2] https://www.npr.org/2024/05/17/1252012825/florida-gov-desant...
[3] https://www.axios.com/2023/09/27/insurance-rates-climate-cha...
[4] https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functio...
[5] https://www.newsweek.com/map-reveals-scale-florida-property-...
If $X is exported from residents of my state out to support another state, that's the same local impact regardless of how populous the destination is or how finely that $X gets split after it arrives.
In any case, I think it's enough to support the idea that there's a tension (if not contradiction) where the states that receive the most absolute benefit are also the ones electing politicians who pretend the exact opposite.
Stronger apart, economy of small scale. These aren't the phrases.
> Trump has criticized former President Joe Biden for his administration’s response to Hurricane Helene in North Carolina. As he left the White House on Friday morning, he told reporters that “it’s been a horrible thing the way that’s been allowed to fester” since the storm hit in September, and “we’re going to get it fixed up.”
> “I’d rather see the states take care of their own problems,” he told Hannity, adding that “FEMA is getting in the way of everything.”
So to be clear, when it happened during the previous administration, it was the administration's fault. When it's his administration, it is the agency's fault and also not his responsibility. And it sounds like the president changes his tune based on whether the disaster was in a red state or a blue state.
Everything that has been said so far is so in conflict with itself so it's hard to guess what a policy change would even be. So my guess would be nothing happens and we don't hear about it anymore as soon as wildfires are out of the news cycle.
Along with the ATF and IRS (for other reasons), its looming and certain villiany rallied sovereign citizen and militia types to organize and arm themselves.
Assuming some of those people now have more political influence than they have had in the past, it seems like the legacy of that mythos could be part of what's at play here.
