6 ms·

I appreciate the insight, this prompted me to poke around the FEMA site and see how transparent they are - to my shock, they actually did a good job of presenti

I appreciate the insight, this prompted me to poke around the FEMA site and see how transparent they are - to my shock, they actually did a good job of presenting the cost breakdowns and where the money goes. This kind of surprised me though: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/shelter-services-program/fy24-awards https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/shelter-services-pr... I knew that the government was paying big money to buy up hotels and other migrant shelters, but had no idea $640 Million was spent out of FEMA's budget on this year alone. This will surely turn into a powerful right wing talking point if the word gets out to that side of the media.. (assuming it hasn't already) I'm not going to lie though, given the current situation and in hindsight how poorly Maui and East Palestine, OH were handled I think it's probably reasonable to ask whether this is what we want/expect from our Emergency Management services. It seems at first glance like they are creating the emergency via deliberately imported avoidable costs, then short changing the tax payers when they are most likely to need their help in a genuine life or death situation. It feels like this money should be coming out of the ICE budget or some other agency, but I'm just a proletariat. The relevant bit: "For Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will provide $640.9 million of available funds to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities. The funding will be distributed through two opportunities, $300 million through SSP – Allocated (SSP-A) and $340.9 million through SSP – Competitive (SSP-C)." I haven't even gotten to the other areas where they almost certainly had a similar level of waste, but I suspect over half a billion could be mighty useful right now. EDIT: Looks like once you know the magic number the news talking about it is easy to find, and it's not just right wing media highlighting this issue: https://www.newsweek.com/fema-migrant-funding-hurricane-disaster-relief-1963336 https://www.newsweek.com/fema-migrant-funding-hurricane-disa... If this doesn't stir the pot, I don't know what will. No matter what happens, people are going to be irrationally (or I guess maybe rationally to an extent) angry.

vel0city 2y ago
Quibbling over $640M over something that will be dozens of billions of dollars. Katrina's costs to FEMA was >$100B. Good chance this will be even more. The people complaining about the $640 million would still be complaining if it was $200M. Or $1M. Or one dollar. > It feels like this money should be coming out of the ICE budget or some other agency FEMA is the agency that's built-up processes and procedures for helping people get housing and other aid, because that is one of its main focuses. That's not what ICE does, they enforce immigration and customs. We're complaining about waste in government but you're wanting lots of agencies specializing in the same thing.
- astroid 2y ago
  I think the people in Tennessee, North Carolina, Maui, East Palestine, and every other botched emergency the last 5+ years would have been pretty happy to quibble about a 'paltry' 640 Million. Also it's not as if this is the -only- money spent on these endeavors. This is one agency in one year, doing something which was unprecedented until they could manage it via Covid 'emergency' measures. You can stick your fingers in your ears if you want, but people are going to be pissed and have every right to be -- just like you have the right to handwave it away if you so choose. I just said ICE off the cuff, but it could just as easily have been Border Patrol or some other agency. At the end of the day, I doubt if you asked many people "Do you want your countries emergency management fund setup so they blow their budget flying in people from other countries and putting them in hotels that you can no longer utilize, more cash benefits than disaster victims that grew up paying taxes here - or would you prefer that money be spent on national emergencies?" I think you would have a hard time finding people who say "oh please, spend that on hotels and shelters and migrant flights! Their wants come before my family and friends needs." And before you give me some spiel about how that's a 'false dichotomy', I'll remind you that FEMA is currently saying they can't afford another storm and are being raked through the coals in how badly they are handling the current one. So it is not a hypothetical situation - they literally said that American citizens are going to have to donate their personal already-been-taxed money to make it through this. That's 640 million that could have not been taken on TOP of the taxes from Americans, because of course people are going to pony up to save their communities. On top of taking at least 1/4-1/3 of every paycheck, they are TELLING us that we have to fund our own rescue. Honest question - what number IS worth quibbling about in your mind? What dollar value legitimizes scrutinizing government spending? I didn't know there was a threshold we had to meet for the concerns to be valid. By that logic if an agencies budget grows large enough, there is simply no valid criticism that can be leveled, and the budget must always go up just like the stocks! I haven't even heard of a single account of someone successfully getting the $750 'immediate need' funded, but I have seen dozens of videos of people crying or angry that they got denied immediately without any reason. Admittedly that's selection bias, but I actively looked for people who did. I also have yet to see a single person who things this is being handled well... and I see a lot of active duty service/reserve members very angry they can't help their friends and family while they are standby to go die for another middle east war we have no business in. Things I learned from this thread: 1) Elon Musk bad, despite using what resources he has to help -- any help is an automatic bait and switch to monopolize the internet (lol) 2) Government spending criticism irrelevant, you have to meet a hazy threshold for the concern to be worth 'quibbling about' 3) HN Users are largely in a very bubbled social circle (online and off), and are going to be shocked when reality penetrates that bubble.

vel0city 2y ago

Quibbling over $640M over something that will be dozens of billions of dollars. Katrina's costs to FEMA was >$100B. Good chance this will be even more. The people complaining about the $640 million would still be complaining if it was $200M. Or $1M. Or one dollar. > It feels like this money should be coming out of the ICE budget or some other agency FEMA is the agency that's built-up processes and procedures for helping people get housing and other aid, because that is one of its main focuses. That's not what ICE does, they enforce immigration and customs. We're complaining about waste in government but you're wanting lots of agencies specializing in the same thing.

astroid 2y ago
I think the people in Tennessee, North Carolina, Maui, East Palestine, and every other botched emergency the last 5+ years would have been pretty happy to quibble about a 'paltry' 640 Million. Also it's not as if this is the -only- money spent on these endeavors. This is one agency in one year, doing something which was unprecedented until they could manage it via Covid 'emergency' measures. You can stick your fingers in your ears if you want, but people are going to be pissed and have every right to be -- just like you have the right to handwave it away if you so choose. I just said ICE off the cuff, but it could just as easily have been Border Patrol or some other agency. At the end of the day, I doubt if you asked many people "Do you want your countries emergency management fund setup so they blow their budget flying in people from other countries and putting them in hotels that you can no longer utilize, more cash benefits than disaster victims that grew up paying taxes here - or would you prefer that money be spent on national emergencies?" I think you would have a hard time finding people who say "oh please, spend that on hotels and shelters and migrant flights! Their wants come before my family and friends needs." And before you give me some spiel about how that's a 'false dichotomy', I'll remind you that FEMA is currently saying they can't afford another storm and are being raked through the coals in how badly they are handling the current one. So it is not a hypothetical situation - they literally said that American citizens are going to have to donate their personal already-been-taxed money to make it through this. That's 640 million that could have not been taken on TOP of the taxes from Americans, because of course people are going to pony up to save their communities. On top of taking at least 1/4-1/3 of every paycheck, they are TELLING us that we have to fund our own rescue. Honest question - what number IS worth quibbling about in your mind? What dollar value legitimizes scrutinizing government spending? I didn't know there was a threshold we had to meet for the concerns to be valid. By that logic if an agencies budget grows large enough, there is simply no valid criticism that can be leveled, and the budget must always go up just like the stocks! I haven't even heard of a single account of someone successfully getting the $750 'immediate need' funded, but I have seen dozens of videos of people crying or angry that they got denied immediately without any reason. Admittedly that's selection bias, but I actively looked for people who did. I also have yet to see a single person who things this is being handled well... and I see a lot of active duty service/reserve members very angry they can't help their friends and family while they are standby to go die for another middle east war we have no business in. Things I learned from this thread: 1) Elon Musk bad, despite using what resources he has to help -- any help is an automatic bait and switch to monopolize the internet (lol) 2) Government spending criticism irrelevant, you have to meet a hazy threshold for the concern to be worth 'quibbling about' 3) HN Users are largely in a very bubbled social circle (online and off), and are going to be shocked when reality penetrates that bubble.