Pragmatism, No Relief OR Teaching A Man To Fish

This has got to be the stupidest argument I've ever read.

Why?

Shouldn't assumption of risk in living in a given city be required? If I live in LA, I should assume there is a risk of earthquake. If I live in Duluth I should assume there is risk of dangerous cold.

If I may assume your position from the detailed response you've given, you feel that we should all assume responsiblity, regardless of whether someone has put themselves at risk? Even if we did not put ourselves at risk, we are responsible for the actions of others?

Actually, as Americans we already cover each other's burdens through our tax system ( hence UNITED States). poor states like mississippi and louisiana benefit from states like california, new york and massachusetts taxes. eg, for every dollar in taxes new york pays, it gets back about $.80 in government services while for every dollar mississippi pays, it gets back about $1.40.

ok, let's all move to... Des Moine? Would that work? We don't need no New Orleans. Who needs that port! We can live without a third of our oil supply. Hey, wait! We could all save on taxes if we just DIMANTLE THE COUNTRY. EVERYONE FOR HIM OR HERSELF! No need for the common defense. Forget about the common good! Fellow citizens struck by misfortune? FUCK 'EM I say! New Yorkers? We know they're a terrorist target. Next time they're on their own. They've been warned.