Author Topic: Kids and politics  (Read 38005 times)

Double negatives make me a sad boy. :c

And the insurance provided by the government isn't stuffty and half ass as you may think. Current insurance companies are just total richards about paying for anything, but the government isn't.
Oh without a doubt! I learned first-hand that the reason medications are so expensive is mainly due to research and production costs. By the time a pill is released out on the market, the companies are already millions if not close to a billion in debt. They have to make it up somehow. And guess who foots the bill? You guessed it, the Taxpaying citizens. I can't remember real well but I believe this country was funded to prevent a government from taxation without representation. That Cash for Clunkers program seemed like an unneeded taxation to me.

That's too long to read :D

You might want to go back into the children section then. Down the hall and to your left.

Best place to learn politics/current events without random bias?

Best place to learn politics/current events without random bias?
1/0 land

Oh without a doubt! I learned first-hand that the reason medications are so expensive is mainly due to research and production costs. By the time a pill is released out on the market, the companies are already millions if not close to a billion in debt. They have to make it up somehow. And guess who foots the bill? You guessed it, the Taxpaying citizens. I can't remember real well but I believe this country was funded to prevent a government from taxation without representation. That Cash for Clunkers program seemed like an unneeded taxation to me.

Insurance companies are manipulative, and nothing justifies that. Trickle down economic ideals leading to subsidies are a conservative idea, and they are horribly flawed.

Cash for Clunkers is taxation how exactly? You get rid of your car and get paid for it.


Insurance companies are manipulative, and nothing justifies that. Trickle down economic ideals leading to subsidies are a conservative idea, and they are horribly flawed.

Cash for Clunkers is taxation how exactly? You get rid of your car and get paid for it.
Because it was funded by the American people themselves. It was nice of the Government to tell us about this. It wasn't paid for by the government and a lot of people were screwed as a result because they had a somewhat decent running car that was paid off totally and bought a brand new 30k car with a 4k credit putting themselves into a several year payment debt to a company. When they couldn't afford the payments, they lost their car completely. Now instead of having a somewhat ok car, they now have none.

Well that's just poor planning on the person's part.


Well that's just poor planning on the person's part.
Yeah, you think they'd learn after the same program (under a different name) caused a massive outbreak of home repossessions.

Looks paid for by the government to me.
Yeah, but where does the government gain it's money from? Surely not an international bake sale. It comes from the taxes of the American people. So in all effect, we all paid for that program.

Yeah, you think they'd learn after the same program (under a different name) caused a massive outbreak of home repossessions.
Seriously.

Yeah, you think they'd learn after the same program (under a different name) caused a massive outbreak of home repossessions.

Actually, it was banks giving mortgages with low rates and no credit checks, and then jacking them up.

Yeah, but where does the government gain it's money from? Surely not an international bake sale. It comes from the taxes of the American people. So in all effect, we all paid for that program.

This is the poorest argument ever. The government has no money except ours, because the government is the representation of the people in an administrative body. Redistribution of wealth from richer people to less never hurt the economy.

Actually, it was banks giving mortgages with low rates and no credit checks, and then jacking them up.

This is the poorest argument ever. The government has no money except ours, because the government is the representation of the people in an administrative body. Redistribution of wealth from richer people to less never hurt the economy.
Which was something the people who bought the houses should have read on their contracts.

Yet we have mounting credit debt because the poor don't know how to spend all this money they're receiving. Seems to be a firm argument.

The poor aren't receiving enough money. Republicans have been in power for too long.