Amazon.com Widgets

Should emergency disaster relief funding be paid for through major budget cuts?

  • We have to budget.

    Yes, emergency disaster relief funding should be paid for through major budget cuts, because we have to cut in one place if we want to spend in other places. It is always good to be able to help in times of emergency. So our spending on welfare, transportation, and defense should leave enough margin that we can pay for emergency services.

  • Yes, its a needed thing

    I think hurricane in the past have shown that we need as much of a budget for these kinds of disasters, but they have to come from somewhere. The facts are that the people need these things to help us provide. The insurance companies can't do this if they have too much to handle. They just walk away.

  • Yes, it should be.

    Emergency disaster relief funding should definitely be paid for through major budget cuts. And the cuts made to pay for this relief should be military cuts. After all, the pentagon themselves said that they were getting money funneled to them that they did not even need. This would be a perfect solution.

  • No, emergency disaster relief funding should not be paid for by budget cuts

    Even when emergency disasters happen and funding is needed, the government should not make budget cuts and take away funding from other important issues. If another project is being funded then there is an established reason that it has funding and that should not be overlooked. It is a slippery slope to prioritize funding when there are many issues that needs funding.

  • It should be donated

    The budget is already being cut every time the new bills come around. There's not much left that can be cut in the budget without causing serious problems. Emergency disaster relief funding is important but those funds should be a community effort. It should come from neighboring states, churches, and other organizations that offer assistance.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.