A Complete Waste of Space

Ok Buzz...here ya go

You seem to neglect to talk about where Romney plans to get the money for his programs.

It sure isn't from the rich like him, but from those who depend on the programs Romney is going to close.

The country isn't a business. It's people. Romney doesn't give a shit about people. He's all about making money, and looking good.

People are blind that can't see this.

Buzz wrote:You seem to neglect to talk about where Romney plans to get the money for his programs.

It sure isn't from the rich like him, but from those who depend on the programs Romney is going to close.

The country isn't a business. It's people. Romney doesn't give a shit about people. He's all about making money, and looking good.

People are blind that can't see this.

Replace the word "Romney" with "Obama", and you will be more correct.

You're right though about the country not being a business... what business can print it's own money?

Buzz wrote:You seem to neglect to talk about where Romney plans to get the money for his programs.

It sure isn't from the rich like him, but from those who depend on the programs Romney is going to close.

The country isn't a business. It's people. Romney doesn't give a shit about people. He's all about making money, and looking good.

People are blind that can't see this.

And what programs are you talkings about?

Lots of them. Don't you ever listen to what Romney is saying, or are you just for anybody but Obama?

One example. Federal funded housing. He plans on putting it on the states. Who can't afford to pay it. A nice way of saying the program will shut down, and millions will be on the street. Does that concern Romney? Not a bit. He makes that perfectly clear.

Well, the federal government HAS the state's money. Returning accountability to the states is good, because there isn't any at the federal level. And I think Romney is a decent candidate, Obama is an abomination. Obama will not stop spending and redistributing from the productive in a way that will devastate our country.

When Obama says he has a plan to reduce the deficit, he is lying.. he has no plans to do that. The evidence is in his actions. He is going to continue to spend everything the federal government takes in, plus ~$1 trillion in additional debt each year. Why do you think he keeps mentioning "investment".....a euphemism for "I'm going to spend a lot more money".

6 of one, and a half dozen from the other.

I just don't like the way Romney is planning to get us out of debt. He wants to do it too fast, and really doesn't care who suffers. Give me one good reason why 3 million millionaires, and 43 billionaires can't pay more? Why close programs from those who have nothing?

Buzz wrote:6 of one, and a half dozen from the other.

I just don't like the way Romney is planning to get us out of debt. He wants to do it too fast, and really doesn't care who suffers. Give me one good reason why 3 million millionaires, and 43 billionaires can't pay more? Why close programs from those who have nothing?

They can pay more, but it's arguable if you can get any more out of em by raising rates with our current tax code. The code is really bent towards giving a lot of options for people to hide their money. And the fedreral spending and obligations are far out of control - to the degree that they can't be paid for, regardless of how much you can extract from the rich.

Also, a lot of the "rich" people are just private business owners who reinvest their capital as needed to grow their business - a tax on that activity is a problem, especially in this stagnant environment. Laffer curve comes to mind.

Buzz wrote:Lots of them. Don't you ever listen to what Romney is saying, or are you just for anybody but Obama?

One example. Federal funded housing. He plans on putting it on the states. Who can't afford to pay it. A nice way of saying the program will shut down, and millions will be on the street. Does that concern Romney? Not a bit. He makes that perfectly clear.

Well Buzz, by your logic? Rhode Island should pay for California. California should pay for? Oh,snap...California's broke. Poor example (pun intended), your example.
It was never "originally" intended for the Federal Government to put a roof over anybodies head. The fact that they did? Was/Is our bad. Putting "funded housing" on the States? Under State controls, is unpalatable to me. Though, more reasonable, doable. On the other hand? Maybe giving them folks a mule, lifetime permit to camp on BLM land/parks in Colorado? Would be cheaper and not burden their self esteem issues? Or yours...

Ya know...I just had this revelation/thought.

The truth/irony of it is?
Staggering....

If the "poor" folks couldn't vote?
You Dem's wouldn't give a feck about'em.

The first two hundred years of this country's history...you didn't.
Only, in the last fifty or so years...when, things started to go to shit.

Under the guise of "helping" the poor? You advocate "hosing" the country.
I'm not talking about the "helpless" poor. The "clueless" poor.