JbarL said:
saying your neighbor is going to get a free house, or they are going to take your guns, or they are going to abort 100 thousands of babies, just becaue they are democrates is really pretty old hat. how manyof you actually live beside someone that is going to get a free house...i know some folks who bought to much house.....and if they cant afford it, i believe that they will be offerd a more affordable one ( theres plenty of them around ....more than plenty )...than be given monies to stay in a house out side of there means.......i believe the language is stay in " a" home.....not necessarly " that" home ....i believe a more modest and income balanced home will be offered to these reciepents before any monies are supplied to unqualified folks.....and i do believe all " good " homeowners are going to get the same oppertunity to refinance at any lowere rates avaliable as well ....speculation based on old outdated politics, repub or dem is out the window now.....30+ yr olds are just now figuring this all out....its not simply apples and oranges....its just fruit salad....some times it just needs a little sugar, so everone likes it. i think the 30+'s are starting to realize its not what you read on a forum or hear on a particular tv network, that has the answeres to there questions and concerns.....and i really dont think they understand the trickle down theory....or the abortion debate of the 60's, or the fear so many spread about a gorup of people that what all guns taken away....or having to pay for your neighbors house.....they arent seeing it....they are the only generation that seems to be willing to let things play out.....cause for sure things cant get worse for them.....we're the generation thats getting all bent out of sorts with it....so for all you 20's/ 30's.....this is what happens to "older" people when the government prints money...so please forgive us....sometimes we get this way...............jbarl
the government is using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion. even if it's one, it's too many. it should be private money. the government shouldn't be providing money for foreign abortions either, which they are. they shouldn't be restricting guns because they look scary. it's a known policy to push for legislation to give up sovereignty to the UN to ban guns. there are two people on obama's cabinet that are actually for that and we are one supreme court justice away from that as well as the most recent gun law in DC demonstrated where it was a 5-4 vote. calling something old hat doesn't mean the threat of it is going away. quite the contrary, there's a renewed vengence for it.
i don't see the difference between trickle down economics through hiring a person and paying them as opposed to doing that through government. government is infinitely more inefficient to do this as it must trickle through a bearaucracy that provides lifetime health care and a better retirement that only reduces the wages that could be paid or prices reduced for the services provided. plus, the government's idea of what people should have is arbitrary and based on class warfare for votes than actual value between two parties.
i get bent out of shape because i pay too much tax that is used for programs that have nothing to do with the limited scope the federal government is supposed to be restricted to, they have basically destroyed states rights.
why should "we" change if the government is approaching 50% of gdp? what percentage is optimum, 100? 105?
incrementalism is the best way to hide the onset of tyranny.
