Let's look at the example of national defense. It's absurd to place that responsibility on the individual in today's day and age. The more efficient way to do things is to delegate and fund a professional military. Why? Because no individual is going to go purchase an aircraft carrier - let alone a modern fighter aircraft. (And that says nothing about the industry necessary to research and develop such things.) The individual has neither the time, talents, or resources necessary. Some things are only efficiently done by group delegation and funding. Call it crowdsourcing if you will. But what happens when you don't have those joint resources...? Everyone suffers the consequences.

"but they have no business using tax payer money to give, or loan money, to people impacted by disasters."

While I understand why you might feel that way, consider the personal responsibility involved. It is one thing to encourage people to be responsible for their own actions and things under their control. It is quite another to hold them responsible for actions they have no control over, such as the proverbial "act of God." I consider the establishment and use of safety accounts prudent and a form of insurance. One can certainly go back and forth about whether such an offering should be public or private; I see issues on both sides of that equation and examples in real life on both sides. (The Deepwater Horizon accident presented failures on both sides.) The problem is that no one can predict who is going to be affected in any given incident and therefore the preparation must be general in nature to be equitable. That's how insurance works: its the one product you buy hoping you never have to use it and it only works as a "shared risk" scenario.

"The states should not own the roads..."

That's a wholly different conversation. Personally, I don't see how private roads other than interstate toll roads can possibly work. The overhead involved in trying to track and charge everyone who drives from one foot of road to another? And one wants to rail against big brother... Thanks, but I'll stick with what we have - flaws and all. (Having worked for a transportation/construction company, I can tell you that if all you did was eliminate Davis-Bacon wage controls, you could lower the costs of Federal road projects by 50% or more.)

Why? Why do you think this is not the responsibility of the individual? The states should not own the roads - but as they do, I can see the state having disaster funds set aside to pay for damage to state owned infrastructure - but they have no business using tax payer money to give, or loan money, to people impacted by disasters. They need to take care of themselves or hope for private sector help - but ultimately they should take care of themselves without expectation that someone else should be responsible for them.

the distast relief funds already exist. it is called private insurance. why should i pay for somebody that builds a hous on a flood plain ir along the ocean if i choose to live where my house and family are safer from those things.te government has no business being in the insurance business where they can steal premiums from the taxpayers.

Why call bad weather anything different than bad weather?
Me dino lives in a central Alabama tornado zone (a F5 missed my home by a quarter of a mile during a "bad storm" during 2011) and I have next of kin with Florida property recently damaged by a hurricane called Michael.
Nobody ever says, "Hey, a climate change storm is coming" or "Hey, a disaster of climate may be on the way."
Anyhoo, there will always be storms and there will always me climate change. I always tell folks to go ask the dinosaurs and the woolly mammoths.

No question that the underlying problem is integrity in our public servants.

Agreed - but the problem is government raids the savings account for pet projects. Simply look at Social Security and the massive amounts of IOU's in the empty coffers.

I think every state should have a disaster relief fund and that fund should be sized appropriate to the populace and threat exposure. For example, every gulf coast state should have an extensive hurricane-relief fund. California should have a large earthquake-relief fund. Mid-west states should have tornado-relief funds. The list goes on and on. This is prudence and it makes them quantify the risk. I don't think it should necessarily be a Federal government thing, but I don't necessarily consider it unConstitutional per se.

I find that funny...

Unconstitutional spending.