Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (150858)	12/13/2005 2:14:59 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793801

My point was to make a contrast between a $250 million grant to Con Ed, which, like NYC was in good physical and financial shape, and the WH's refusal to make the same grant to Entergy-NO, whose infrastructure was devastated and is now in bankruptcy. And my point is that your choice to argue "need" is not likely to prevail. I'm not trying to delegitimize your feelings or your reaction, only give you a (unsolicited and probably unwanted <g>) sounding board on strategy. I think 9/11 set a precedent, but the WH doesn't think so. I think it set a precedent, too, but not as broad a one as you. I think it sets a precedent for enemy sneak attacks. Next dramatic sneak attack, if it happens, the victims will be able to claim precedent, methinks. The precedent for hurricanes and floods is a different one.

To: carranza2 who wrote (150858)	12/14/2005 3:22:41 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793801

Most interesting letter c2! Did you write it to the Editor of the paper, or to a reporter? Hopefully it does get published. Even IF you didn't have such a disaster to cope with, and IF nothing had happened, what you wrote does seem to be a perception "out there." But since you have the problem, and the disaster is so huge, we really do have to all get it straight in our heads how we're going to cope with the various problems, and what the various decisions will mean to the entire country. 1) Are Man-Made disasters the same as Nature-Made disasters? (i.e. 9-11 vs. Cat 4 and 5 hurricanes...) Personally, I view them as very different situations and should be coped with differently. WTC I, the Pentagon plane-bombing, and 9-11 type disasters are man-made, and hurricanes, earthquakes etc are from nature. The man-made disasters are a direct threat to the entire country, and thus should qualify for Federal help. We have to sort out the nature made disasters, between State and Government help, and who is responsible for what cost, and who is responsible for implementing the repair, etc. 2) Do we as a Nation, have a concrete plan as for how to cope with a nature-made disaster? If so, I haven't seen one. 3) Do you really want the Feds to come in, tell the States what to do, and where to do it, etc? Or do you just want the Feds to pay for whatever the folks in the State say they want the Feds to pay for? State vs Federal authority.....exactly where and exactly when? I personally think that we citizens should be demanding our State and Federal Government get a guideline in place. Now. And let it be public. I think the States are so different in approach, and yes, in various demands (some totally unreasonable,) that it is no wonder we don't have a plan as yet. But, it is at our peril that we do not have a plan.