The post office is one government agency U see as essential and red's post sums it up. The USPS does not need to earn money to keep operating. They do not have to constantly change prices to make a profit. A corporation or privately owned company would. Also the post office offers a uniform service that many companies would not or could not match.
Who gets food to these people? Who gets their medicine for them? Who assists with their daily needs? Surely there is someone or they would be dead already. Does the government have a database showing who these people are and where they are located? If some poor disabled person drowned because they couldn't get out, how can you blame the government?
Im sure each case is different. I don't think its about blame nor do i care who assists them in their daily lives. I simply don't think its best to let other humans simply die if they are incapable of caring for themselves without another means. Not in a country such as ours. im sure there's quite a few of your 'nam vets wandering the street who don't know who they are. I think they would blame the govt. Im also sure you've been to a VA hospital as well but that's another story.
That's pretty much the same argument the nursing home owners are making ... yet they have been charged with a crime. If government isn't accountable, then how can individuals be?
Nursing home owners were being paid to care for those people and accepted them into their custody, that is fact. One could argue (and I am one of those), the government isn't paid to care for people. Then again, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Hillary would say different.
Exactly. I'm not advocating letting anyone die. I was referring to the folks who live in the inner city who needed to get out and couldn't. There is not a big board somewhere that lists these people so everyone knows exactly where to go to get them. Someone needs to make "officials" aware they are there and they can't get out.
SabanFan, did you read that article that I linked about that earlier? I would think you could appreciate it because I remember you saying something, albeit more succint, almost exactly like it a few weeks back in re: to Katrina.
Why can't I or anybody sue the government for decisions people make that affects or kills other people then? Smoking, drinking, guns? All these things are legal yet have consequences to people's actions. People are killed from drunk driving, some die from drinking. People kill people with guns. Smoking gives you cancer. The point is people made decisions from the poor people who didn't leave to the medical providers, police, nursing home, etc. The owners of that nursing home are the ones that sealed those people's fate and not the government. The government declared a "mandatory evacuation" for a reason. They wanted everyone to leave and didn't want to be responsible for those left behind. Why should government take the blame for people's decisions one way or the other?
Then the government shouldn't tell people they will take care of them in an emergency. We can argue that point, but that isn't the real issue here. Look at the government's disaster plan. It specifically talks about measures they will take to evacuate those who can't evacuate themselves. They didn't do that. If they have no intentions of doing it, say so in plain english. Don't fool people into believing they will be there for them in an emergency.
That article should be required reading for all bleeding hearts like Ted Kennedy who think that you can just shove food in their mouthes and they will be happy and continue to vote Democrat.
