Few Republicans supported it along the way, calling the measure a new "entitlement" program and suggesting it was a special benefit for New York.Hold on now - if we're not willing to spend $7B on the very people who were at the scene risking their own lives, then why are we spending a trillion dollars and an entire decade for an event that was just "New York"? If Republicans are okay with refusing care for people that were actually physically debilitated by 9/11, then don't they have to stop pretending to give two shits about it? Why is it okay to spend the trillion dollars, but not the $7B? I understand it's all lot of money, but do you understand that whatever you spent on lunch today is closer to $7B than $7B is to a trillion dollars?
If they don't care about the people actually affected by 9/11, why are we spending decades at war over it?
2 comments:
I think it's a question of determining at which point victims and their families are adequately compensated.
According to this article over 38 Billion has already gone out to help indivuals, families and businesses. This amount was the sum of monies from both government and charitable sources.Even when a person survives a plane crash or is involved in an auto accident, the lawsuit settlement is a one time event, not an ongoing salary from the fed govt, funded by fellow Americans. The enormous amount of money involved in fighting a war which we did not start is a separated issue.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/defenseandsecurity/a/randon911.htm
can you separate the pork from the beans...
Post a Comment