|
Post by Ron Bath on Jul 20, 2007 11:07:55 GMT -5
Please someone enlighten me by showing me one thing the Govt. has there hands in that actually doesn;t get screwed up. Then also costing us more in the long run(raising taxes, for those us that actually pay them) for worst and below grade service. Why would anybody beleive a national health care system run by the govt be any different.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Paradis on Jul 20, 2007 18:26:21 GMT -5
Please someone enlighten me by showing me one thing the Govt. has there hands in that actually doesn;t get screwed up. Then also costing us more in the long run(raising taxes, for those us that actually pay them) for worst and below grade service. Why would anybody beleive a national health care system run by the govt be any different. That is a scary thought. Even if the individual government employees were competent, the politicians would muddle it up somehow. It would be too big to manage.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Bath on Jul 20, 2007 19:32:15 GMT -5
It would be too big to manage
That's the problem it is too big to manage. Are Govt was never meant to be this large and run every aspect of are lives. It was meant to be run by the people. When are we going to wake up and make individuals stand up for themselves and be responsible for there decisions in life.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2007 20:33:54 GMT -5
Please someone enlighten me by showing me one thing the Govt. has there hands in that actually doesn;t get screwed up. Then also costing us more in the long run(raising taxes, for those us that actually pay them) for worst and below grade service. Why would anybody beleive a national health care system run by the govt be any different. Here is one thing: NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology www.nist.gov/public_affairs/general2.htm I've pasted the general info page. If you scroll down to the What We Do part, you will see some specific innovations and technologies that NIST has made possible through research paid for by government funds. It has generally enjoyed bipartisan support (i.e. it is not a political arm) and has enabled American industry to remain not only competitive in the world economy, but to lead in certain forms of cutting-edge science and technology development. It is not a regulatory agency, nor is it a defense pawn. Its purpose is to help American industry, the products of which wind up working their way into everyday life. Dollars saved by improving technology or workplace efficiency exceed NIST's budget by orders of magnitude. e dit: I think you guys are talking mostly about actual "governing," so my post may not be relevant, since NIST plays no role in this..
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Jul 21, 2007 10:57:44 GMT -5
Erick: MOST ARE ALREADY LARGE FARMERS NOT the small ones, who are subsidized by the Gov't, so they're already getting paid and PD for a product that won't work!.... Its OTHER products that are effected ,like milk, beef etc, were prices have skyrocketed because corn is going to ethanol ....
|
|
|
Post by Mat Helmer on Jul 21, 2007 12:20:19 GMT -5
Erick: MOST ARE ALREADY LARGE FARMERS NOT the small ones, who are subsidized by the Gov't, so they're already getting paid and PD for a product that won't work!.... Its OTHER products that are effected ,like milk, beef etc, were prices have skyrocketed because corn is going to ethanol .... Just be happy that they aren't using fresh water for fuel yet... can you imagine the anarchy that will cause!?
|
|
|
Post by Erick "Zap" Szczap on Jul 21, 2007 13:31:09 GMT -5
Erick: MOST ARE ALREADY LARGE FARMERS NOT the small ones, who are subsidized by the Gov't, so they're already getting paid and PD for a product that won't work!.... Its OTHER products that are effected ,like milk, beef etc, were prices have skyrocketed because corn is going to ethanol .... I don't differentiate between large farms and small ones, sorry. My point still stands. When we spend money on American made fuel sources, the money is still circulating within our own economy, rather than going into the pockets of rich arabs or venezuelans that wish the worst upon us under their breath. Having said that, I don't see ethanol as the long term answer, but it's still a better option IMO. I'll gladly pay a few bucks more for milk, so long as it ends up in Farmer Joe's pocket instead of King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud's.
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Jul 21, 2007 16:09:24 GMT -5
ETHANOL IS NOT AN ANSWER...GEESH!!!!!!!!!! Its a waste except for the LARGE MillionaireFARMERS!!!!!!!! Look up the cost of it... BTW: you know how much GAS is spent to make ethanol since EVERYTHING has to be trucked?.. Guess how much ethanol is a gallon?
17% of our oil comes from "rich Arabs" (its theirs to do with). Venezuela is another story.....
If the libs and environmentalists would allow us (imagine them ALLOWING US), to drill in ANWAR, off the coasts, build refinaries, Nuclear power (70% of Frances power is nuclear.... ;D), harness the oil shale rock in the west, etc, etc....We wouldn't have to RELY on Venezuela, the Middle East, Sweden, Canada, Mexico, etc, etc....
BTW: I'm sure the fortunate would be glad to know why milk and other important products have gone up all for B.S.....AH why give milk to kids anyway......
|
|
|
Post by Erick "Zap" Szczap on Jul 21, 2007 18:20:31 GMT -5
I'm far from being an environmentalist, so by all means feel free to start drilling anwr...but understand that even that fuel source will run dry someday. Eventually this country will need another form of energy, so why not truly commit ourselves to finding that energy alternative now?
|
|
|
Post by Justin Kaufman on Jul 21, 2007 19:35:23 GMT -5
I was listening to the radio the other day and they were explaining, that milk was going up because the cost of the feed was going up i.e. corn.
I stopped and thought about this "ethanol" thing, milk went up for $2.75, to almost $4.00. Next I here that "BEER" is going up because it is more profitable to grow corn instead of wheat.
The cost of a gallon of "Ethanol" is about $2.49 , here you pay more for milk, beer and the conversion of your vehicle to "Ethanol", is it really worth it in the end, I think not. Get a more efficient "unleaded" fuel car maybe but the "Ethanol" thing, I'll pass!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by gambit on Jul 31, 2007 21:35:51 GMT -5
Exactly, Justin, it cost way more to produce Ethanol than it does to drill, transport, and refine crude oil.
Erick, an ample supply of fuel is located near Fort Worth, Texas. The shale could produce billions of barrels of raw materials to be refined for many, many years to come. It is cleaner to drill for and a lot less of an impact on the environment. Of course we could grow crops of corn to produce a noticeable supply of alternate fuel - Ethanol - but land can be over worked and not produce what is needed. Of course there are much more viewpoints which could benefit each avenue, but I wanted to give this one as an example.
|
|