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 (151165)	12/15/2005 12:08:47 PM
From: SirWalterRalegh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793958

C2- Why not have FEMA make the determination in the first place and cut the agency's involvement? Seems to me that you have accused FEMA of being grossly incompetent. RB

To: carranza2 who wrote (151165)	12/15/2005 12:23:41 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793958

Why not have FEMA make the determination in the first place and cut the agency's involvement? That was my point, C2. They can't legally do that. The best they can do on the fly is set up some collaborative arrangement where they co-locate, cross-train, and arrange system access to both agencies. Actually, I think my idea about SBA doing an expedited rejection of the obviously unqualified is a pretty good one. (They used to pay me to come up with things like that, you know. <g>) that doesn't mean that policymakers should not have set up a different system. The system was set up way before Katrina like everything else with emergency response. And like everything else, it didn't have the foresight to address a Katrina-like event. This is way down the list of lack-of-foresight demonstrations. The wetlands were number one and the evacuation plan, number two. Rebuilding loans and grants might come in around 37 or so...