TSA and FEMA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.


The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

Yeah, it is so dumb to not check people BEFORE they enter the airport.

Right?? Why don't they have security checkpoints before entering airport grounds??

It will be current security lines x 10 at least. If you're going by 'check everyone entering airport grounds', you're checking a whole bunch of people that are not intending to fly. I have also flown through airports where everyone that enters is checked, and generally, what that means is that the only people entering the airport, are people who're flying (they're checking tickets and IDs). So if you are picking up someone from the airport, you will be waiting for them outside. If you're dropping someone off that needs help (say with luggage, or securing a wheelchair, or with language problems), you won't be allowed to go in and help. It just creates long backups OUTSIDE the airport.

Pretty sure that was a sarcastic comment by poster before you. Uber drivers could be stopped multiple times/day if they started checking non-fliers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.

The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

It would be better if airlines were forced to fund TSA instead of tax payers. Then the people who actually fly could pay for the salaries of those who keep the flights safe.

Where do you think the airlines will get the money to fund the TSA? From the consumers who buy tickets. All costs will be passed to the consumer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.

The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

It would be better if airlines were forced to fund TSA instead of tax payers. Then the people who actually fly could pay for the salaries of those who keep the flights safe.

Where do you think the airlines will get the money to fund the TSA? From the consumers who buy tickets. All costs will be passed to the consumer.

Check out how much all the CEO’s are paying themselves. They’re rolling in profits, much of it thanks to taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Pffft. Who needs FEMA?

Oh. That's right. The poor ass red states who contribute very little to the US gov.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pffft. Who needs FEMA?

Oh. That's right. The poor ass red states who contribute very little to the US gov.

California?

[Anonymous]

I know a Trump voter who is a contractor for TSA. I guess he will be another regretful Trump voter if his contract goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pffft. Who needs FEMA?

Oh. That's right. The poor ass red states who contribute very little to the US gov.

California?

dp.. but CA contributes a lot to the fed coffers. Red states, not so much.

[Anonymous]

No individual state (with the possible exception of California) could stand up an emergency agency able to deal with large disasters like this. That's why we have FEMA in the first place.
Florida would be completely screwed if it had to rely on only state resources, and the coming years look bleak in the Sunshine State.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pffft. Who needs FEMA?

Oh. That's right. The poor ass red states who contribute very little to the US gov.

California?

California pays for almost everything. It is time to break the country up. MAGA wants all the taxes from California and wants to send troops in to occupy it. No thank you.

If the blue states do not get anything but a jack boot to the head why should those state stay in the union?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.

The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

It would be better if airlines were forced to fund TSA instead of tax payers. Then the people who actually fly could pay for the salaries of those who keep the flights safe.

Where do you think the airlines will get the money to fund the TSA? From the consumers who buy tickets. All costs will be passed to the consumer.

^PP is saying that is how it should be.

But I don't trust private industries to police themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.


The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

Based on this theory, there should be no public goods. All roads, buses, trains, and anything else that qualifies should be private and only those who use them should pay. Yes, there will be no taxes but everyone will be paying a private contractor to travel, educate kids, any everything else. So people won’t complain about taxes but the fees. Still going to pay one way or another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pffft. Who needs FEMA?

Oh. That's right. The poor ass red states who contribute very little to the US gov.

California?

CA doesn't need the US Government the way the Government need's CA's money. That's a fact that is easily checked through a simple Google search.

Top 10 states most dependent on the Federal Government:
1. New Mexico
2. West Virginia
3. Alaska
4. Mississippi
5. Montana
6. Hawaii
7. Vermont
8. Louisiana
9. Alabama
10. Wyoming
These states all received more federal money than they contributed.

Top 10 states least dependent on the Federal Government:
1. California
2. Nebraska
3. Massachusetts
4. South Dakota
5. Washington
6. Florida
7. Illinois
8. Delaware
9. New Jersey
10. Minnesota
These states all contributed more to the Federal Gov than they received from the Gov.

California paid $587,616,657 in taxes to the Federal Gov in 2023 and only received $116,803,579 from the Federal Gov.

https://digg.com/finance/link/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-ranked-59CWzbWb10

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know a Trump voter who is a contractor for TSA. I guess he will be another regretful Trump voter if his contract goes.

Oh well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it realistic that these agencies could actually be eliminated?

Let’s be real TSA requires all travelers to line up next to each other. There is no screening before that happens. Someone can come straight in from the street with a bomb or guns and there is a ready made target.


The cost of TSA should be borne by the industry that requires the security but all tax payers. The vast majority of Americans are lucky if they fly once a year. Why should they pay for services they do not use while subsidizing rich frequent flyers?

Based on this theory, there should be no public goods. All roads, buses, trains, and anything else that qualifies should be private and only those who use them should pay. Yes, there will be no taxes but everyone will be paying a private contractor to travel, educate kids, any everything else. So people won’t complain about taxes but the fees. Still going to pay one way or another.

lol public good? Right now it is broken socialism that you and your maga friends are pushing. Let’s take The money from the blue states and give it all to the red states. Why should the blues states continue in a system that only benefits the red states while punishing the blue states?

[Anonymous]

TSA is a necessarily evil even though it’s mostly smoke and mirrors. Prior to TSA, security was contracted out to private companies who would literally hire anyone off the streets. I remember having to get an interpreter at MIA so that I could converse with the person running the magnetometers.