You will all think I'm coldhearted...
 

ok, you may all think i'm coldhearted...

that is, if you don't think that already :p

I'd like to know: Why on earth are the families of 9-11 victims entitled to a government payout? I watched an archived news report the other day that said the average compensation was to exceed a million per family. If it were up to me, no one would get a dime of a single government dollar. if there is help it would have to come from the private sector.

why would i say such a thing?

one day while i was in my 7th grade English class on a beautiful sunny morning a horrific explosion rocked the building, breaking windows and knocking pictures off the wall. the day was April 19th and 168 people from my Oklahoma City community died.

not a single person who's family member died that day is getting a fraction of what every single relative of a WTC casualty seems to be uniformly entitled to. am i griping that we didn't get our fair share of government charity? absolutely not.

my point is, why is it that the victims of 9-11 are so different? what makes them different from the families of civilians who are kiled in American embassy bombings? what makes them more entitled to a MILLION FREAKIN DOLLARS than a poor police officer who is gunned down in cold blood on a texas highway because he happened to pull over the wrong car?

too bad it would be career suicide for a politician to bring this up.

On this issue I agree wholeheartedly.

otherwise they vote for kerry :p

I agree with you -- it is not the government's role to act as a charitable organization, in the US or elsewhere.

You asked why these families are getting so much money. If you think like the people who are giving them the money, the answer is pretty clear. First, who's giving them the money - the government, which is made up of polititians. What is the primary purpose of a politician? - to get re-elected. From the politician's viewpoint, paying the "poor, suffering" families of 9/11 victims tons of cash makes them seem human, sympathetic, and all the other goodness that gets them votes at the next election. 9/11 is a cash-cow for politicians, and they're milking it for all it's worth.

IP,
of course you're coldhearted. Compassionte conservatism is an oxymoron. :D

Seriously, though, no one flew an airplane into the Murrow Bulding, and suing the fertilizer or rental truck industry almost certainly would have been laughed out of court. Suing the airline industry, however, seemed like a pretty good idea, and it's already teetering. So congress used a ton of our tax money (I thought conservatives were <i>laissez faire</i>) to bail them out and then a ton more to set up a blood money fund to keep 3000 families from all trying to get multibillion dollar settlements from the hole they had just flushed our money down.

So it's not charity; it's corporate welfare for the airlines.

Perhaps instead of suing the airline industry, they should focus thier reserves and sue Al-Qaeda, instead.

I also agree that any compensation for victims of 9/11 needs to come from private donations, rather than federal dollars. I'm all for helping those in need, but I don't think that anyone ever intended for the victim's families to get wealthy over it. It's pathetic to think that the most fiscaly responsible thing that you can do for your family is to have gotten killed in the World Trade Center.

I'm not totally sure, but from what I remember, that million per family DOES come from private doations to various charities to help the families.

I could be wrong, but that's what I remember.

I think it's stupid too. These people were murdered. This sets an interesting precedent. If my uncle is murdered by a serial killer, do I get a check from Uncle Sam?

Yes. Call your local police HQ and ask them about their victim's fund.

I suspect that irateplatypus doesn't actually know whether people were compensated in Oklahoma and how much each victim was given--he might be assuming that no one received anything.

The amount and media exposure to the 9-11 victim's fund, however, was precipitated by the fears cited by Tophat. I don't know specifically where the money is coming from. Last I heard private donors along with insurance corps were involved. This fund was set up to ensure the money was spread equitably instead of one litigant taking the whole billion and to make it so trial lawyers couldn't get their sticky hands in the pot (a point I think I've seen some of the current posters rail against, so I'd think you'd actually support this decision if you were to be consistent with your earlier views).

In short, victim funds do and have existed for a long time. Unless you know where the money is coming from, this doesn't seem like you have much to upset about in terms of you don't even know what or who to be pissed at (for example,if this is all coming from charitable donations and insurance money, what's it to you?).

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...198866,00.html

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/200...ess/index.html

http://www.nctimes.net/news/2001/20011222/54224.html

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/5/prweb39577.htm

some types of compensation were offered to OKC victims, but that was mainly limited to their pre-existing relief policy of $100,000 just for being a federal employee. Additional compensation was limited to $75,000 in most cases. 50 million was earmarked for the disaster relief fund, but you can see how much of that trickled down to the victims.

as for the 9-11 victims, 2 billion dollars comes from private donations... an estimated 3 times that number will come from public government coffers. the average payout to a 9-11 victim's family will approach 1.85 million.

there was legislation sponsored by senators Nickles and Schumer to add OKC bombing victims to the same benefits as 9-11 victims, but this was rejected by the President.

OKC victims were given their legal compensatory dues, but next to nothing on top of that. This stands in stark contrast to 9-11 victims. if you want to keep it limited (my preference) do that. if you want to shower them with millions, do that, but be consistent. i suppose i fail to see the 1.83 million dollar difference.

Thanks for the links. I only read through the first one, and it was very informative.

I found these two sections interesting (from page 3):

You want to know why? Cause there's 7 million regitered voters in New York, that's why.

cynical, yet disturbingly plausible.

You know, Mike Trivisonno today (dj on Cleveland's WTAM 1100AM), talked about this today and said something that truly made sense.

How much do we pay the miltary member's family who are over there giving their lives?

We're paying mostly rich white people's relatives off for losing a loved one who just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. AND SOME OF THE WTC FAMILIES ARE TELLING THE GOVERNMENT IT ISN'T ENOUGH????????

Meanwhile, we have men and women dying in Iraq (politics and feelings about the war aside, they are risking life and limb to service this great country) and their families get a coffin with a flag and maybe the $50,000 life insurance policy.


I know the families from the OKC bombing got a little something, (like $150,000), does anyone know if the Pentagon families or families of the people on the planes got anything? And how did this great government decide that those in the WTC were worth at least 10x those in OKC?

This isn't a ploitical issue and should not be, as I remember Bush AND Lady Ice Queen Clinton and others from BOTH parties stood together on this.

Sad. All I can say is, if you find it as pathetic as I do please write your congressman an e-mail, snail mail or call his office.

Paying for civilian tragedies and doing nothing for the ones in harm's way...... what a country at times.

i do agree, they should not get money. no other time in our history (to my knowlege) has this happend. i think it may even be hush money. did they not have to sign an agreement not to sue the airline's or anything else like that.

just a wad of money to keep your mouth shut.

If I'm reading this right, I think the WTC families got more money because the government was able to seize money from illegal funds. Also I think there were some law suits filed on behalf of the family targeting the house of Saud on instances of terrorism.

A friend of mine had an artery nicked by flying glass during the Murrah building bombing (she was in the Journal Record building across the street). She almost died and was in the hospital for a long time and didn't receive anything.

The lawsuits I don't know about. I suppose if someone can win millions for spilling hot McDonald's coffee on themself anyone can win about anything. However I truly don't see how a lawsuit can fly on a terrorist act.

No I seem to recall Bush and Ms. Shrillery, and men and women from both parties saying how they were setting up a fund with taxes. Also, if I recall the families didn't have to pay taxes that year. Considering there were quite a few multi-millionaires they saved a bundle and got a bundle.

All the while the families of the men and women returning in military caskets recieve nada from our government and still have to pay taxes. How do you explain to a 5-6 year old kid you have to move because daddy or mommy died in the war and you can't live in on base housing anymore, or have to move out of your apartment because you can't afford the rent? Sure you get the insurance but it ain't much and the government holds it as long as they can.

And before someone yells people die all the time military deaths happen same as anywhere else, we shouldn't have to pay or give them anything. To that I say YOU ARE HEARTLESS AND HAVE NO LOVE FOR COUNTRY BECAUSE THEY DIED DEFENDING YOUR RIGHTS (regardless of what you think of the war, they died serving us). They deserve far more than anyone's family who lost someone because they were just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

And what of the people who died on the street or in the buildings nearby? What of the police and fire men and women who died doing their jobs? Do they get a piece of all this money? Probably not.

Equality and Captalism regretably don't go hand in hand. I am glad that there is releif possible for victims of circumstance but we need to insure equality based on need and not publicity.

The reason the victims of 9/11 got money is because it made Bush look good. Instead of not giving any money out at all, why doesnt the government give out money to all who have suffered from a terrorist attack. Also I think a tax exemption would also be good compensation.