I guess the problem then is I care about having a government that doesn’t want to kill me or leave me to die, then. Excuse me, I should have been caring about civility within our decaying governing structure while people roast alive on the street! Oh you’ve made me see the light, you sure have.
I’m not trying to convince you this is correct, just explaining the politics behind why the situation exists. Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don’t.
The federal government can assist, it just needs local permission to do so.
This skews awful close to typical AM radio “the SHERIFFS need to have DIRECT CONTROL of the counties to BRING LAW AND ORDER back to THE STREETS” chud rambling. Local isn’t always better, especially not in Sundown State petty tyrannies with echoes of the Confederacy.
It’s the responsibility of the larger government entity to step in in some cases. Like in the cases of natural (or semi-natural) disasters or if the local governance shits the bed to the extent that people are dying. We’re not dealing with free imperial cities of the Holy Roman Empire here, cities aren’t sovereign entities they’re administrative regions for the government.
But how long does it take to figure that out? A few days?
This isn’t the Holy Roman Empire, but the bureaucracy isn’t as fast as people think it is and the initial response is still expected to be lead by the state. By the time it becomes apparent the federal government should step in, the response has already failed.
But in the end, there needs to be a specific authority to answer to disasters. Right now, and for a while, it is state governments as making the federal government responsible erodes state sovereignty.
Outside of Trump, the federal government is there to help when asked, but it is still the responsibility of the states to manage response efforts.
Our state and federal governments also don’t have issues working together outside of a Trump led administration, but the first emergency response is expected to be led by local and state governments that the disaster happens in.
My state routinely lends state disaster response units around the country to make sure that they are up to speed on different methods of disaster response in disasters that my state expects to see. However, it isn’t all disasters as my state doesn’t get all disasters.
And I’m explaining the American thinking as the disaster is occurring in the United States of America.
The problem is that the alternative is having the federal government immediately intervene in any emergency, which states would likely complain about.
I guess the problem then is I care about having a government that doesn’t want to kill me or leave me to die, then. Excuse me, I should have been caring about civility within our decaying governing structure while people roast alive on the street! Oh you’ve made me see the light, you sure have.
I’m not trying to convince you this is correct, just explaining the politics behind why the situation exists. Or maybe you want a strongman who will protect you until they don’t.
Are you seriously doing the Tough Independent Rugged Real American LARP here?
Did you build your own home? Do you repair your own roads? Do you check your own food for botulism?
I was noting that the failure of the disaster response seems to be due to local government officials failing in their job.
What is the responsibility of a larger government entity for the governance of cities?
Presenting a oh-so-large-its-scary government entity assisting locally during a disaster as a bad thing is certainly a take.
The federal government can assist, it just needs local permission to do so.
This skews awful close to typical AM radio “the SHERIFFS need to have DIRECT CONTROL of the counties to BRING LAW AND ORDER back to THE STREETS” chud rambling. Local isn’t always better, especially not in Sundown State petty tyrannies with echoes of the Confederacy.
And the federal government is mobilizing to assist, but they aren’t going to be in the initial response.
It’s the responsibility of the larger government entity to step in in some cases. Like in the cases of natural (or semi-natural) disasters or if the local governance shits the bed to the extent that people are dying. We’re not dealing with free imperial cities of the Holy Roman Empire here, cities aren’t sovereign entities they’re administrative regions for the government.
But how long does it take to figure that out? A few days?
This isn’t the Holy Roman Empire, but the bureaucracy isn’t as fast as people think it is and the initial response is still expected to be lead by the state. By the time it becomes apparent the federal government should step in, the response has already failed.
deleted by creator
But in the end, there needs to be a specific authority to answer to disasters. Right now, and for a while, it is state governments as making the federal government responsible erodes state sovereignty.
Outside of Trump, the federal government is there to help when asked, but it is still the responsibility of the states to manage response efforts.
deleted by creator
Our state and federal governments also don’t have issues working together outside of a Trump led administration, but the first emergency response is expected to be led by local and state governments that the disaster happens in.
My state routinely lends state disaster response units around the country to make sure that they are up to speed on different methods of disaster response in disasters that my state expects to see. However, it isn’t all disasters as my state doesn’t get all disasters.
And I’m explaining the American thinking as the disaster is occurring in the United States of America.
deleted by creator
If you want to bring up Katrina, W Bush wasn’t asked to bring in more resources by the state of Louisiana after landfall.
Name a time outside of Trump where the federal government denied aid to a state requesting it.
Then let the states complain or, better yet, dissolve the fuckers