Boscastle - why should they receive government aid?

[Rumad]

OK I was watching the news this morning and there was yet again another news story about Boscastle and how bad they have it.

Now I know wha has happened is very upsetting for them and I personally think they have had a rough ride, but the latest lobby is that they should receive government aid like a disaster area somewhere else.

Now while this sounds all well and feasible, in UK history no other flood victims (in recent times) have received any form of aid. What the government has done though is strengthen flood defences and watr diversion routes to avoid such things in future.

But why on gods earth should they be given aid???????

I think if the government do cave in it makes a mockery of there stance with previous flood victims like houses and people at Bridgnorth.

Anyone else have a view on this?

[Dante Hicks]

It depends what the aid is for. It might be that statutory obligations for local government can't be met without central government intervention. Or it could just be "give every resident a hundred quid to help them out". The term "aid" by itself is meaningless. How much is going to end up compensating home owners? How much is going to shops? etc, etc. From the little I know, I think the National Trust owns parts of the infrastructure there - and there is probably some precedent for bailing out the national trust.

Either way, consistency just for the sake of consistency seems wrong headed. If we are going to have state intervention then we may as well base it on some element of need. A rich area will need less support than a poor area if both faced the same disaster for instance.

[Sunday8pm]

I don't agree with the aid, unless it's to repair public amenities in the area, Bocastle sounds relatively remote and it sounds like the flood damage is on a scale that make the other flooding look like deep puddles.

I guess it's all on a situation by situation basis. Usually area's that get flooded will get word that river x is about to bust it's banks, so they can sandbank up and move stuff, this was more on a pair with the deadly shit that happens in south america and southern asia.

I need to look more into this but I doubt this is smoe sort of photo-call much like the maligned florida explotation going on by Bush atm.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

It depends what the aid is for. It might be that statutory obligations for local government can't be met without central government intervention. Or it could just be "give every resident a hundred quid to help them out". The term "aid" by itself is meaningless. How much is going to end up compensating home owners? How much is going to shops? etc, etc. From the little I know, I think the National Trust owns parts of the infrastructure there - and there is probably some precedent for bailing out the national trust.

Either way, consistency just for the sake of consistency seems wrong headed. If we are going to have state intervention then we may as well base it on some element of need. A rich area will need less support than a poor area if both faced the same disaster for instance.

I jus think that while these people have had significant hardship, places like bridgnorth go through this every year. I am sure they have hard times as many of those afected suffer significant material loss, many of whom are old and retired etc.

While I agree that givernment intervention should not be based on consistency I do think that since the government has already let people suffer I think individual compensation would be wrong. I do think they should invest in the public amenities etc, but this would set a very dangerous precedent when you consider the level of others who have been effected by similar tradgedies in the past.

[meglamaniac]

Personally I wouldn't have much of a problem with it.
Name one other recent flood disaster in this country involving 10 foot deep floods and houses actually being knocked over.

A bigger place might have more resources, but having visted the place myself before I can say if anywhere would need a bit of a prop up after this, it'd be there.You forget it's only livelyhood is tourism, apart from a few fishing boats.
That's both its sustainable incomes screwed now isn't it. Even if people wanted to visit in it's current state, the few small shops and businesses are mostly gone, and so far as fishing goes thats a no-go until the harbour has been dredged out (and someone has to pay a lot of money for that remember). Even the harbour carpark and slipway is buried under 5 or 6 feet of silt. It's still unknown how many cars are even in the carpark because they're all completely buried.

While any flooding causes all sorts of horrible problems, you have to admit this is a lot worse than a 3 foot flood from a stormy sea - and what you don't get with sea flooding (or most river flooding, to this extent) is such a huge amount of mud and silt needing shifting as well.

[JC]

Originally Posted by Rumad

But why on gods earth should they be given aid???????

We send millions of pounds worth of aid all over the world every single year. I dont think its asking too much that we give aid to our own country when their is some kind of disaster.

[Rumad]

I cna see there are things which need sorted, but wh does te emphasis for this particular disaster have to be on the government?

Surely Bridnorth has had regular and recent floods which have effected the livelihood of thee tourism (Bridgnorth is one of tose places you visit), bu no aid was forthcoming. Surely houses have been knocked over in 100 mile an hour winds but that has never been an aid situation.

I just think that in allowing subsistence in this instance is grossly unfair whn you consider all the cases that have gone before without help or assistance.

I have no problem with aid be given if its applid fairly and consistently and if they are given help on a individual basis then I think this would be grossly unfair.

[JC]

Have you seen the pictures Rumad? When can you honestly remember seeing a disaster this large in Britain? Its not a run of the mill flood, it was 2 months worth of rain in 2 hours.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by JC

Have you seen the pictures Rumad? When can you honestly remember seeing a disaster this large in Britain? Its not a run of the mill flood, it was 2 months worth of rain in 2 hours.

I remember the winds of a few years ago that ended in houses being demolished.

I am not belittling what has happened. It is indeed extremely sad and seriously feel sorry for everyone that has lost something in what has happened.

Doesn't mean I agree with aid though since Some comparable situations (gale winds and bridgnorth flooding as well as flooding in other rural areas) have not been dealt with in a similar manner.

[JC]

I have never heard of Bridgenorth and i generally keep up to date with the news and have a decent memory so i'll assume that whatever flooding has occurred there wasnt on the same scale as at Boscastle. The same goes for those winds, i dont think they created the same amount of devastation to one small isolated village as this flood has.

The only UK based disaster on the same kind of scale as this that i can think of is the 'hurricane' of '87.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by JC

I have never heard of Bridgenorth and i generally keep up to date with the news and have a decent memory so i'll assume that whatever flooding has occurred there wasnt on the same scale as at Boscastle. The same goes for those winds, i dont think they created the same amount of devastation to one small isolated village as this flood has.

The only UK based disaster on the same kind of scale as this that i can think of is the 'hurricane' of '87.

probably was 87 then after all I am getting quite old

As for Bridgnorth it has already suffered significant flooding year on year. Usually making te ground floor unliveable. Also episodes in yorkshire where homes had to be abandoned because of heavy flooding. Its wrong to say that because someone had 8 ft of water that those that have 5ft of water don't count for te same treatment. Whatever the level of flooding people lose there belongings, homes and generally have a bad time.

The point still stands that n such assistance is given usually and places lieYorkshire and Bridgnrth suffer such events regularly.

While I understand and appreciate it was higher levels and that it was sad and not very nice for thse involved , why on earth should they be given special treatment when no other natural disaster that has occured has received?

I agree with things like the clean up and making amenities available, but when it comes to personal recompense I draw the line.

I see it as special treatment for something which is a regular occurence elsewhere.

[Sunday8pm]

Rumad, There is a massive scope of difference between, gradual alerted flooding that perhaps make your ground floor unliveable.

And sudden FLASH flooding that there were no alerts for, that people couldn't evacuate or make other arrangements in regards too, that had no previous regular history of happening, that knocked down not just the odd house but most of the town, that buried people's cars under immeasurable amounts of silt, that ruined a whole harbour that won't recover on it's own without excessive financial investment.

Bridgenorth is a) used to these things b) recovers once the flood goes away with people just having to claim off their house insurance.

I assume a lot of the aid going toward Bocastle is to repair public amenities, install emergency shelters for the many that are now homeless WITHOUT Forewarning at least until they can sort out their housing insurance claim, to replace any council housing in the area immediately (rather than allow it to become real estate with a price), to fix the harbour which is prolly not insured at least to the extent that would financially able them to get it back in order asap with regards to the livelihood and continuity of the town.

You do not see the difference here between, people almost dying and losing pretty much everything compared to people getting their trousers wet and unable to use the livingroom for a week or too or take a nice drive.

[Rumad]

Actually the residents in bridgnorth cannot get insurance against flood damage and in most cases yes they d have sm efforts in trying to defed brignorh, but th en result is the same structural damage and people loosing possessions.

I do see the differences but there are also similarities that cannot be ignored.

[Sunday8pm]

So when Rumad goes hungry cause his paycheck is late or he's ran out of food in his cupboard then the red cross and the UN and Oxfam should come rushing in with emergency food supplies right?

You need that grain and tinned food stat! your hunger is just as important as the hunger of someone in sudan....

(just pointing out how you are massively missing the point here and picking on a similarity that seems totally irrelevant to the longer consequences of the actions that can be taken)

[Rumad]

i am not mising the oint - n on died, people lost possessions, som ven los walls.

In no other tradged has at happened whether r whether not i was on a lesser scale, people suffered material loss and emotional distress.

I wont run out of food though as I am paid very well and i wouldn't expect support for something like that.

However if I was a member of a community lie bridgnorth I would feel there was a inequality.

I have not said anywhere that what these people have gone through has not been traumatic, but at the end of the day no one else has received special treatment like that for similar events which were still distressing to those involved.

[lokken]

simple social solidarity.

Everyone who pays taxes regardless of how much they pay deserves equal protection and treatment by the state. I'd expect protection if it was my town, and so should they.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by lokken

simple social solidarity.

Everyone who pays taxes regardless of how much they pay deserves equal protection and treatment by the state. I'd expect protection if it was my town, and so should they.

I agree with social solidarity if its applied evenly and fairly.

I have seen news stories (living in the black country) about Bridgnorth regularly. Its a predominantly Older community and you see many old people without power, heating or wh have lost many posssions in the flooding.

These people lose things of significant value and with it their self respect and hope.

Its easy for people to say its not as bad as this for boscastle, but they lose alot and some even lose there home (structural damage). I basically think that if the govenment does assist thats the wrong decision when you consider that some have lost just as much in places like bridgnorth.

I jus findit sickening that a few people could yell aid and the government jumps yep outying communiies prone to this lose time and time again and no help is forthcoming for them,

[Sunday8pm]

You seem to misunderstand similar.

Your hunger when you are hungry is similar to anyone else being hungry, in fact it could be compared to people in famine stricken countries in africa being hungry.

The goverment gives away every years TONNES of free food in aid to these countries where there are hungry people, why not give it to people when they are hungry here and keep the charity/aid at home?

Basically because we are in a position to provide for ourselves and our Hunger and that there are no circumstances we haven't already been alerted too or aren't in our control that could prevent us at any level from getting a couple of meals a day at least.

However in Sudan and other similar countries there is no course of action these people can take to accquire something to sait their hunger.

When people are flooded across and I mean flooded in the since of 2-3 foot at most the UK it is usually proceeded by weather warnings, for those that are regularly flooded, they are already familiar with the process, know when the banks are going to burst, already have things sorted with the insurance claims company and have already accepted the responsiblities that come with living there and how to protect their important valuables and to make sure they are not excessively inconvenienced.

Bocastle had no major warnings days in advance, they flooded in excess of what is usually the average for the uk, well in excess. This wasn't a regular occurance, most definately at this extreme, people will need help from the goverment to recover from this cause there were no measures already put in place to deal with something like this happening in that area.

THIS IS WHY THEY ARE GETTING AID CAUSE THEY CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE IN WHAT ARE COMPARITIVELY MINORLY FLOODED AREA'S CAN ALREADY ACHIEVE CAUSE OF THE EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES.

I really don't think I can explain this anymore than this, if you still don't get it don't take offence when I start referring to you in a derogatory manner with regards to your intelligence cause I think it'd be justifiable by then.

[Phang]

when the flooding was happening, i was watching it on the news in a laundrette less than 8 miles from boscastle. it wasn't raining.

[Tomkat]

If it was your town and your home that got knocked down, and EVERYTHING you own ruined through being flooded, I think you'd appreciate a little aid too Rumad.

Have you actually seen the news? It's terrible what's happened there. I feel so sorry for the people who it happened to.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

You seem to misunderstand similar.

Your hunger when you are hungry is similar to anyone else being hungry, in fact it could be compared to people in famine stricken countries in africa being hungry.

The goverment gives away every years TONNES of free food in aid to these countries where there are hungry people, why not give it to people when they are hungry here and keep the charity/aid at home?

Basically because we are in a position to provide for ourselves and our Hunger and that there are no circumstances we haven't already been alerted too or aren't in our control that could prevent us at any level from getting a couple of meals a day at least.

However in Sudan and other similar countries there is no course of action these people can take to accquire something to sait their hunger.

When people are flooded across and I mean flooded in the since of 2-3 foot at most the UK it is usually proceeded by weather warnings, for those that are regularly flooded, they are already familiar with the process, know when the banks are going to burst, already have things sorted with the insurance claims company and have already accepted the responsiblities that come with living there and how to protect their important valuables and to make sure they are not excessively inconvenienced.

Bocastle had no major warnings days in advance, they flooded in excess of what is usually the average for the uk, well in excess. This wasn't a regular occurance, most definately at this extreme, people will need help from the goverment to recover from this cause there were no measures already put in place to deal with something like this happening in that area.

THIS IS WHY THEY ARE GETTING AID CAUSE THEY CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE IN WHAT ARE COMPARITIVELY MINORLY FLOODED AREA'S CAN ALREADY ACHIEVE CAUSE OF THE EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES.

I really don't think I can explain this anymore than this, if you still don't get it don't take offence when I start referring to you in a derogatory manner with regards to your intelligence cause I think it'd be justifiable by then.

Firstly your comparison of hunger is extreme and inappropriate. Comparing third world hunger or any significant disaster in a third world country is just wrong.

Secondly you again sated that they are covered by insurance, in Bridgnorth's case you are wrong since many insurance companies will not touch them with a barge pole and they cannot sell the houses concerned.

I don't think at any point I have not said how said or how bad it must be for those people involved.

Yes the scale was bad but seriously think about it. People have lost stock, buildings, material possessions. All of that has happened in bridgnorth to people who can barely walk let alone have the funds to replace what was lost.

Where is the equality in allowing boscastle aid?

Things like this happen throughout the entire uk. People lose a lot if not everything in floods, forest fires and winds. I have never seen government assistance for them and i am sure some Do have insurance, but I still fail to see any equality in taking a decision to give them money from central government to help them.

If a decision is taken to give aid I think it will be nothing short of disgusting.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

If it was your town and your home that got knocked down, and EVERYTHING you own ruined through being flooded, I think you'd appreciate a little aid too Rumad.

Have you actually seen the news? It's terrible what's happened there. I feel so sorry for the people who it happened to.

I know is terrible - but what makes boscastle such a special case?

[Sunday8pm]

I'd sue the real estate agents/surveyors if I lived in bridgenorth and couldn't sell my house cause obviously they bought it in a retardedly high risk area.

Once again, Nature wins when peeple think taht you can build on flood plains and it won't flood.

Seriously though, Are you looking at the same bocastle we are? What's happened in bocastle is comparitive to what happens in bangladesh etc.

[Gunn3r]

what kind of children eaters are you? your own country is flooded and you whine because you don't want to give them any AID? :|

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Rumad

Actually the residents in bridgnorth cannot get insurance against flood damage

The inability to get flood insurance is usually a sure sign that they're on a flood plain. They should move.

Most flood disaster relief is just a bail-out for financial institutions who write mortgages without requiring flood insurance or--worse--for properties which can't get flood insurance (because they're on a flood plain or similar area which is frequently flooded).

In the US, flood insurance is heavily regulated and prices are set artificially low. Normally, this would be a recipe for financial disaster for the insurance companies but the government has guaranteed these policies. Nevertheless, most homeowners don't buy flood insurance because everyone expects the government to bail them out anyway. :/

[Rumad]

I don't disagree with anything said here, but simply i hasn't ben given in any other instance.

Your right it s on a flood plain and yes they are at risk, but simply these people just cannot sell there properties at a level where they can move to another residence. These are people who have past retirement and cannot aford t just up sticks and have probably lived there for many years. Its only in recent years that it has become so disaster prone.

So tell me Sunday are the OAP's who simply cannot afford to leave those properties or people who lose there houses with significant water damage any less victims than those that have lost there houses at boscastle?

The way it happened may differ, but it still happened.

[Sunday8pm]

Dear Rumad,

When you talk about flooding elsewhere in the UK that doesn't get aid, are these pictures regular of how flooding regularly hits the uk?

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...bmerge_203.jpg

Clearly 500 million pounds worth of damage to one town is regular with flooding in the uk

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl...math/img/3.jpg

No this isn't a wrecking/car dumping yard, this is clearly a regular example of damage to any town that get's flooded in the UK

The driver of the white car won "The Most Dramatically Stylish Parking" award for 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl...all/img/10.jpg

Please do share your pictures of the flooding of bridgenorth that was knowingly regulary flooded and in a flood plain (for reference the last time a flood on this scale happened in the area was 1952 and not even anywhere near this village from what I understand)

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

Dear Rumad,

When you talk about flooding elsewhere in the UK that doesn't get aid, are these pictures regular of how flooding regularly hits the uk?

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...bmerge_203.jpg

Clearly 500 million pounds worth of damage to one town is regular with flooding in the uk

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl...math/img/3.jpg

No this isn't a wrecking/car dumping yard, this is clearly a regular example of damage to any town that get's flooded in the UK

The driver of the white car won "The Most Dramatically Stylish Parking" award for 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl...all/img/10.jpg

Please do share your pictures of the flooding of bridgenorth that was knowingly regulary flooded and in a flood plain (for reference the last time a flood on this scale happened in the area was 1952 and not even anywhere near this village from what I understand)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/feat...llery_47.shtml

I am sure you can find some bad pics on that site.

http://www.dudleymall.co.uk/loclhist/bewflood.htm

Bewdley just down the road from Bridgnorth.

We can bash with things like this all day, I am sure that Boscastle was horiffic and there was lots of devestation, but it doesn't mean aid should automatically be given.

Public amenities and the clean up should almost definitely reside with Tax payers, but people around the country suffer loss year in year out and no assistance is given to them.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Rumad

But why on gods earth should they be given aid???????

If they find it hard over the next, say, 8 months to feed their families, or clothe themselves or find shelter there's a strong argument for giving them assisstance in these areas. I'm unsure of what you mean by "aid" frankly. I don't think many of us would begrudge them a few loaves of bread but perhaps giving them their own Pacific island each is a bit too much.

Originally Posted by Rumad

While I agree that givernment intervention should not be based on consistency I do think that since the government has already let people suffer I think individual compensation would be wrong.

This just makes no sense, the second half of your sentence clearly contradicts the first half. In support of the idea that government intervention should not be based on "consistency" I'd like to point out that if we followed this concept no policy change could ever occur.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

If they find it hard over the next, say, 8 months to feed their families, or clothe themselves or find shelter there's a strong argument for giving them assisstance in these areas. I'm unsure of what you mean by "aid" frankly. I don't think many of us would begrudge them a few loaves of bread but perhaps giving them their own Pacific island each is a bit too much.

When I say aid I mean the sort o financial ai many would not get in similar positions from other disasters. Recompense to start again.

I don't begrude anyone monies for hotels or for bread or for heaters and such, which is aprt of any basic social model, what I do find offensive that they are talking about rebuilding the village o what it was before, when others who have been part of significant flooding events have been left to sort things out for themselves.

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

This just makes no sense, the second half of your sentence clearly contradicts the first half. In support of the idea that government intervention should not be based on "consistency" I'd like to point out that if we followed this concept no policy change could ever occur.

ActuallY I think it makes sense, I am saying that while I agree that government help should be given, but not as a result of boscastle. I understand a underlying statement should be made to assist those that suffer such hardships throughout the country. However whatever help and assistance is give should result in asses which are owned by the UK government. I don't agree with recompense which may result in certain individuals receiving money which may be unfortunate, but is harly making them destitute and definitely not which assists those that can afford such losses.

At the end of the day any assistance has to have some level which EVERYONE nationally receives the same help. Ofcourse disasters will vary and the level of recompense should vary as well, but assistance should be for all not in one case and not in others.

Once such a statement is made I would whleheatedly withdraw my argument, but at present I don't see any such statement forthcoming.

[Sarina_Joy]

/nick NInja_spammer

Bridgenorth = regularly flooded because its on a flood plain and residents can predict when the floods come and thus can prepare. also it happens every year thus they have the choice to *leave* and no longer be flooded.

Boscastle = 'freak' weather causing massive flash floods in an area not known for flooding and the residents having no chance to prepare or leave the area to avoid it.


The first is a feature of the area and thus its the responsibilty of the residents to pay their way because they choose to be there, the latter is once in a life time disaster (possible overstatement) and thus eligble for goverment relief aid.

Perhaps the RAF and coastguard choppers should not have been dispatched (at great cost and risk) because its the problem of the locals not the govt ?

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sarina_Joy

/nick NInja_spammer

Bridgenorth = regularly flooded because its on a flood plain and residents can predict when the floods come and thus can prepare. also it happens every year thus they have the choice to *leave* and no longer be flooded.

Boscastle = 'freak' weather causing massive flash floods in an area not known for flooding and the residents having no chance to prepare or leave the area to avoid it.


The first is a feature of the area and thus its the responsibilty of the residents to pay their way because they choose to be there, the latter is once in a life time disaster (possible overstatement) and thus eligble for goverment relief aid.

Perhaps the RAF and coastguard choppers should not have been dispatched (at great cost and risk) because its the problem of the locals not the govt ?

Many live in bridgnorth not because they want to, but simply bcause they cannot afford to move.

The houses are virtually worthless - one of the local public houses have recently transferred ownership. Freehold as well. Now pubs usually seel fr 250,000 or so with the freehold. The pub in Bridgnorth went for 69,000.

Now if thats what a ub is going for imagine those poor houses and the residents that live there.

Agreeably some are taking a risk which is of their own volition - but what of the older people who have little or no choice? Where is the fairness in that?

I don't think anyone can deny or would wish to deny emergency support, but financial support which woud result in gain from the disaster isn't right either.

Also AS i Say there have been other disasters in the uk where people have lost things due to acts of god and no government support has been forthcoming for them. The cries of aid are all well and good but I fail to see fairness when you consider others have lost things repeatedly without the same safety net.

[Sunday8pm]

Originally Posted by Rumad

http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/feat...llery_47.shtml

I am sure you can find some bad pics on that site.

http://www.dudleymall.co.uk/loclhist/bewflood.htm

Bewdley just down the road from Bridgnorth.

We can bash with things like this all day, I am sure that Boscastle was horiffic and there was lots of devestation, but it doesn't mean aid should automatically be given.

Public amenities and the clean up should almost definitely reside with Tax payers, but people around the country suffer loss year in year out and no assistance is given to them.

I'm sorry but after investigating, if you think the flooding and moreover the flood damage there is ANYWHERE on the same scale as what just happened at bocastle you need your eyes tested.

I think this is an unfortunate case of yourself being stubborn on this issue when every other poster has posted for the aid much to the shock of how you have reacted. If there is somethign deep seated and personal (friend/relative) stuck up there I can see why you might feel that the goverment hasn't helped them (though seriously wtf, if they moved there then they should sue the surveyors who didn't spot the flood risk?) but stop fighting a personal crusade on here against something that vastly outweighs it, I mean I doubt you've even read any of my post or if you have you most certainly didn't understand the numbers quoted, I severely doubt if this thing you are comparing against it has so much as come close to 10% in damage costs in flooding over the years.

Perhaps, just perhaps you should accept that everyone here is telling you, you are wrong and you should investigate as to why. I think anyone with an iota of observational skills and an unbiased viewpoint could easily pick out why, in fact I'm pretty sure I Could show these pictures to a group of school kids and ask them which one deserves help the most.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

I'm sorry but after investigating, if you think the flooding and moreover the flood damage there is ANYWHERE on the same scale as what just happened at bocastle you need your eyes tested.

I think this is an unfortunate case of yourself being stubborn on this issue when every other poster has posted for the aid much to the shock of how you have reacted. If there is somethign deep seated and personal (friend/relative) stuck up there I can see why you might feel that the goverment hasn't helped them (though seriously wtf, if they moved there then they should sue the surveyors who didn't spot the flood risk?) but stop fighting a personal crusade on here against something that vastly outweighs it, I mean I doubt you've even read any of my post or if you have you most certainly didn't understand the numbers quoted, I severely doubt if this thing you are comparing against it has so much as come close to 10% in damage costs in flooding over the years.

Perhaps, just perhaps you should accept that everyone here is telling you, you are wrong and you should investigate as to why. I think anyone with an iota of observational skills and an unbiased viewpoint could easily pick out why, in fact I'm pretty sure I Could show these pictures to a group of school kids and ask them which one deserves help the most.

In ths issue there is no right or wrong, just opinions.

I tried to point out in Jonny's post whY I have made the stance I have. I find it ludicrous that we would even consider assistance for other than immediate welfare stuff when we simply don't do it in situations where such water can cause sufering and misery in other areas.

[Sarina_Joy]

/nick Ninja_spammer

Are you saying that bridgenorth never *ever* in the last 100 years ?


The goverment cannot be expected to constantly subsidise people to live in an area that is relatively uninhabitle. If they want help to build permanent flood defences then that is fair enough (most areas recieve this anyway) but emergency aid year in year out is not acceptable imho. However would more sensible for the aid to be directed into moving the residents into an area which is not regularly turned into a reinactment of the sinking of atlantis.

However you cannot compare funds for area development (perm flood defences,house/city design) to funds meant for emergency aid which is what you seem to be saying.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sarina_Joy

/nick Ninja_spammer

Are you saying that bridgenorth never *ever* in the last 100 years ?


The goverment cannot be expected to constantly subsidise people to live in an area that is relatively uninhabitle. If they want help to build permanent flood defences then that is fair enough (most areas recieve this anyway) but emergency aid year in year out is not acceptable imho. However would more sensible for the aid to be directed into moving the residents into an area which is not regularly turned into a reinactment of the sinking of atlantis.

However you cannot compare funds for area development (perm flood defences,house/city design) to funds meant for emergency aid which is what you seem to be saying.

Is only been in recent years whe insurance companies ave refused residents of Lower town in bridgnorth (no e) have been unabe to ge insurance. Thats becaus in the last few years flooding has become more regular and consistent.

In das gne by it had a 1 in 20 chance of flooding more recently thee has been a flood once every year or two years.

These people that have bought property recenty are taking a risk, however the older community that have lived in Bridgnorth for many years can hardly be blamed for this and the subsequent wipeout in value of there homes (if you can't get insured yu can't get a mortgage).

AS i say there have been significant other places where things like this has happened and no government support has been frthcming. HArdly equitable now is it?

[JC]

Originally Posted by Rumad

In das gne

I dont want to harp on about the same thing Sunday moaned about, but seriously, type better so that i can atleast work out which letters are in the wrong place and form words from them.

[Sarina_Joy]

Ok, no E in bridgnorth.

Days has a Y

Gone has an O

Have has an H

There has an R

Recently has an L

[JC]

Oh, in days gone by . I was sat there thinking and thinking and i couldnt think of what might be trying to say.

Cheers Sarina .

[Obliterate]

Originally Posted by Rumad

Things like this happen throughout the entire uk. People lose a lot if not everything in floods, forest fires and winds.

I can't remember EVER seeing a flash flood this bad in the UK. And forest fires? wtf? when was the last time a whole town got devastated by a forest fire in this country?

[Vaio]

The poor sods had to suffer terrible flooding, loss of possetions and risk of death but all of that is nothing compared to having that fat useless piece of shit John Prescott turn up and pretend to give a shit. why do politicians feel the need to visit disaster areas ? Is it so they can have a gloat before they rush back to their comfy flats in London and get back to the rent boy/someone elses wife/womens underware, an apple and a noose ?

~Vaio~

[Vaio]

oh, and stop being a troll Rumad

~Vaio~

[Sandsnake]

****ing greedy bastards. What's the point of government if not to protect their people and help them out when shit happens that they can't control?

We just had a hurricane wipe out a large area. You don't hear people crying about them getting help. No, people want to know what they can do to get them MORE help.

This is about people, real people. If you don't give a shit, do the world a favor and remove yourself from the gene pool.

[Dante Hicks]

I don't really understand the bitterness. OK, another region didn't get aid when they got flooded (even saying they are the same type of thing). So what? Surely the best thing would be to create a precedent now of giving aid (if that's the right thing to do).

[Sunday8pm]

I think the count for telling off Rumad for poorly typed posts and stupid trolls(he isn't trolling he's deadly serious I've found out) is now massively outscaling me, however It's now deriding from the point.

I think he may have someone personally involved in the area and we are due a greater explanation as too his fascinating irrational infatuation with this place being on a par with what hit florida...

[Rumad]

I am not trolling.

If I wanted to troll I could think of better things to troll about.

I agree a new precedent must be set, but not like this where a protest lobby actually influences central government decisions. Its something that needs a framework and needs actually sorting in the correct and appropriate manner.

Now as for my typos (which is what they actually are beleive me or not, I am endeavouring to check posts as much as i can before pressing submit. I am not perfect but I am making as much of a effort as I can to check it before submission. Now STFU pls kthxbye.

I have several relatives that live in the Bridgnorth area. 2 of which are breadline OAP's who simply will experince hardship on a scale which is similar to those in Boscastle.

I fail to see any equality here. The severity may be worse but the end result remains the same. I fail to see why all of a sudden aid should be given when throughout the years of past experiences Councils and Governments have refrained from helping those that have suffered significant losses.

You may think I am bitter and twisted and harping on, but we all have views, we all feel strongly about certain issues which are emotive and on which we have firm beliefs.

This is mine and they wont change.

On a sidenote it looks like donations through a public fund is going to happen as central government has handed control back to the local council. From a personal point of view I hope it stays that way.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Sandsnake

****ing greedy bastards. What's the point of government if not to protect their people and help them out when shit happens that they can't control?

We just had a hurricane wipe out a large area. You don't hear people crying about them getting help. No, people want to know what they can do to get them MORE help.

This is about people, real people. If you don't give a shit, do the world a favor and remove yourself from the gene pool.

Thats easy to say for you. The american govrnment has a inteventionist policy which over the years has helped lots of people. I wouldn't mind that happning here if it was applied evenly and consistency and personal gain was kept to a minimum.

No one should profit from a disaster, least of all the victims.

[Sunday8pm]

ok so we've established you are crying over the fact that the goverment is ignoring your two OAP Aged relatives who cannot afford to move elsewhere and apparrently moved there in the first place (cause if they were with a council housing scheme I'd assume they'd of been moved by now).

I'm sure many people here will say well I told you so and have next to no sympathy with regards to the very little aid they recieve.... the goverment doesn't want to foot the bill for what turned out to be surveying errors and people stubbornly living there until they get some sort of compensation.

However Bocastle is on a totally different scale, unique out of the blue disaster that I doubt you would of even put in the same bracket as bridgenorth had people actually died (which could of happened and in fact it's ridiculously amazingly fortunate given the massive at least 10 thousand times worse the extent that flash flood was in comparison to everything I've read that has happened to bridgenorth with regards of flooding) so until it takes a few people turning up dead I guess you are going to feel like hey you know they aren't worth it.

Rumad perhaps face up to the fact you've been arguing for a biased and unfactual and uncomparable point here, comparing bridgenorth to Bocastle is like comparing a homeless UK guys hunger to a kid in a famine stricken african country's hunger.

You are way off the mark and if you had any humility you'd apologise for bringing this personal trash opinion that belong on some double figure average iq board rather than here.

In fact I implore someone at least condemns you to RP for even suggesting that the bocastle residents are PROFITEERING off of this tragedy.

You are a massively insensitive ****wit.

[Rumad]

Originally Posted by Obliterate

I can't remember EVER seeing a flash flood this bad in the UK. And forest fires? wtf? when was the last time a whole town got devastated by a forest fire in this country?

Firstly Boscastle wasn't a town it is a village and answer to your question one hot summer we had sporadic fires on many of the places we have large grassland/woodland. I can't remmeber the year, but houses burnt down and ppl lost lives etc.

Clearly it wasn't on the scale of this, but why is scale such an important factor?

If people lose belongings, houses and lives why does it matter?

At the end of the day you need some level of consistency where all can be covered, no just the few.

[Sunday8pm]

Originally Posted by Rumad

No one should profit from a disaster, least of all the victims.

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

In fact I implore someone at least condemns you to RP for even suggesting that the bocastle residents are PROFITEERING off of this tragedy.

You are a massively insensitive ****wit.

Originally Posted by Rumad

No one should profit from a disaster, least of all the victims.

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

In fact I implore someone at least condemns you to RP for even suggesting that the bocastle residents are PROFITEERING off of this tragedy.

You are a massively insensitive ****wit.

Originally Posted by Rumad

No one should profit from a disaster, least of all the victims.

Originally Posted by Sunday8pm

In fact I implore someone at least condemns you to RP for even suggesting that the bocastle residents are PROFITEERING off of this tragedy.

You are a massively insensitive ****wit.

Take this as a hint to stop posting Rumad. Please for the love of god.