August 2014 Napa Valley Earthquake Relief for the Pacific Act (Debating) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 13, 2024, 08:38:45 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  August 2014 Napa Valley Earthquake Relief for the Pacific Act (Debating) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: August 2014 Napa Valley Earthquake Relief for the Pacific Act (Debating)  (Read 4529 times)
DemPGH
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,755
United States


« on: August 30, 2014, 07:00:31 AM »

2.5 billion is excessive to say the least. A figure in the hundreds of millions would be a more reasonable starting point I would think, certainly for an earthquake.

And yes I do want to take care of the winemakers.

I'll look into what the federal government actually does in RL in these situations - I think it depends upon how extensive the damage is, and it's different from say a hurricane.
Logged
DemPGH
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,755
United States


« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2014, 03:11:25 PM »
« Edited: August 30, 2014, 03:15:30 PM by DemPGH, President »

Napa county officials placed total damages (buildings, infrastructure, economic) at around 360 million dollars, so the 500 million range would be a good starting point because I don't know how extensive it all is. I know Napa County got hit hard. We could develop priorities, and people without earthquake insurance should indeed get help. Wine and agriculture suffered about 48 million in damage. Just FYI.

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/08/28/6662469/napa-officials-estimate-earthquake.html
Logged
DemPGH
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,755
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2014, 02:41:25 PM »
« Edited: September 22, 2014, 03:50:12 PM by DemPGH, President »

900 million is literally as absolutely max high as I'd be willing to go and would positively like a bit less. I mean, after a while this stuff all adds up, guys.
Logged
DemPGH
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,755
United States


« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2014, 12:14:05 PM »

But I didn't think the purpose here was to pay for everything. I'll probably revise it down, ftr.

900 million is literally as absolutely max high as I'd be willing to go and would positively like a bit less. I mean, after a while this stuff all adds up, guys.

...

Oh, now you care. A trillion dollars for this is good, a trillion dollars for that is fine, but God forbid money would actually be spent on something that wouldn't wreck the economy! Jesus Christ.

There are people made homeless in our region. People whose livelihoods are at stake. This is necessary action.

Me? I'm just saying that there's a predilection to want to toss a hundred million here, a few hundred million over there, another hundred million that way, and so on, and I'm wondering if people are keeping count. I've been pretty consistent in that regard. It's also ironic that you guys usually complain about a bloated, overreaching federal government. Huh
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 11 queries.