Story Comments
Posted by: PapaWolf 1 year, 8 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>A couple of elitists aren't you. You think that taking every bodies money and giving them everything from the government is what should happen, at least according to the candidates you have today.
So you think taking everyone's money & giving it to the richest individuals & corporations is better?
And, btw, our candidates do NOT want to take everyone's money & give them everything from the gov't. They just believe that giving little things, like policemen, firemen, hospital & emergency care, clean water & air, safe food, safe roads, & levy systems that actually work, is better than giving tax breaks to oil companies who are raking in the largest profits in world history, or the richest 1% who take that money & send jobs overseas.
Reply-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I suggest that you look at their web sites. They both want the government to be the universal health care giver. That alone will be a huge tax increase. Great Brittian has a problem keeping up with the money. Arthritics and people with heart problems are now supposed to self medicate.
There are many programs that they want to put in place as well. Not enough money in the US to pay for Clintons and Obama want to do even more.
How old are you anyway. I remember going to Lancaster, CA and driving from LA to there. I would come up out of the brown smog and go into the clean air over the mountains. At times from there you could see the brown gunk spilling over the mountains. That does not exist today. Lake Erie was considered a dead lake that would take hundreds of years to clean up. Lots of fish are there now and people go swimming in it. The Mississippi River was called the colon of the US. That has been turned around.
etc.
Where have you been or did you do a memory flush.
Reply-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>They both want the government to be the universal health care giver
Again, would you rather give your money to the richest in this country?
On Universal Health Care: my company pays about $18,000/year PER EMPLOYEE for LIMITED health care & ever-increasing co-pays & prescription drug prices, to a company whose sole purpose is to make money. I think I could handle getting that $18k in income & having the gov't take even up to $10k of that for Universal Health Care, whose sole purpose IS TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE.
Even with that seemingly exorbitant tax increase, I'm still $8,000 ahead - not to mention the co-pays & prescription drug price increases.
Reply-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What government program has ever been efficient except the armed forces. Every time the government creates a bureaucracy the nightmare begins. Layers on layers of people creating and trying to apply the rules. Who gets what and who doesn't. Who goes where and for what.
Look at Great Brittan. Arthritics and Heart problems are self medicated as of about 3 months ago. You have to wait for months to see a doctor if you are allowed to see one. Sometimes you get in and you are told that they are not allowed to see you for that particular problem and have to go somewhere else. Get in line again.
Really great.
Reply-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>What government program has ever been efficient except the armed forces.
If that were the case, exactly why are we using more private contractors (mercenaries) in Iraq than in the history of this country?
And, fyi, Medicare costs only about 3% for overhead. Your typical insurance co. is at about 17%, give or take. THAT is a bit more efficient than the private sector.
Reply-
-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>Could it have to do with the fact that Clinton cut the military to the bone. A favorite thing of Democrats.
You forget that the BUSH adminstration recommended the cuts. Also, this admin was planning on attacking Iraq even before 9/11. So why didn't it start building up the military BEFORE it attacked? Could it be that W's trying to enrich a few cronies that actually run private contractors like Haliburton, KBR, Blackwater, etc.?
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>Not enough money in the US to pay for....
There would be without the Iraq fiasco & tax breaks to the richest & corps.
>>I would come up out of the brown smog and go into the clean air over the mountains.... That has been turned around.
And the Bush admin is trying to reverse that progress with BS progs like Blue Skies, Healthy Forests, increased mercury levels, etc.
I grew up in the "Chemical Center Of The World." The air there was so bad people actually had their lungs burned just by breathing in. The air has been cleaned up & at one time it had the best drinking water in the country. Thanks to Reagan, Bush-1 & Bush-2 policies, pollution levels are increasing, the Feds are forcing local Environmental Offices to allow polluting of streams, & "Free Trade" forced the sale of the drinking water system to a foreign company w/noticeable declines in water quality.
Reply-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If we quit having an armed forces we still would not have enough money.
What garbage you are spouting. They are trying to have sensible rules that people can live with. Some rules that were passed are not in the realm of obtainable.
Of course that means nothing to the environmental wackos.
Reply-
Neutral
PapaWolf1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>>Of course that means nothing to the environmental wackos.
Wanting to be able to breathe without frying a lung, or drink water without risking mercury contamination, is not exactly in the "wacko" realm.
Just remember - without an ecology, there is no economy. If people can't live, they can't buy stuff.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment positively. Is it really that bad of a comment?
People Who Didn't Like This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment negatively.
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.