Monday, November 7, 2011
A moral dilemma?
The comptroller where I work was one of the unexpected victims. He had water that washed into his finished basement. His son's bedrooms are down there along with a rec room - all carpeted. Of course the carpet needs to be replaced. It sounds like little else was damaged to the extent of having to be replaced so he was fairly lucky.
Now, as most people know, one's regular homeowners insurance will not cover damage from flooding. He figured that he'd have to foot the bill for this himself and has since ordered new carpet to be installed.
He found out late last week that he was eligible for money from FEMA. He had thought previously that he wouldn't have qualified because he was under the impression that it was an income-based aid program and his is not a low income household. (Well, he and his wife both work and she works for the state so yeah. Surely they wouldn't qualify for anything for low income folks.) But anyway, he's signed up to receive funds from FEMA.
For some reason, this bothers the heck out of me. No. It actually offends me! Here is a situation where a person is eligible for financial aid from the government but - given the shape the economy is in - is it right for him to accept the money? He certainly would not suffer hardship from footing the bill himself, so maybe he shouldn't accept the money. After all, there is a finite amount available and he is taking money that could be used to help less well-off individuals.
What do you think? Is this a moral issue or am I off base?