Prev: Unemployment hits 10.2% for October. What's behind that number?
Next: slowpoke general contractor got us $6,000!!! (home tax credit)
From: Marsha on 9 Nov 2009 21:25
Gary Heston wrote:
> In article <7a6gf5pi473mfh8n47sftvtchbh5du30hr(a)4ax.com>,
> Napoleon <anarch(a)666yes.net> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>> Socialize the medicine and you no longer pay the 1000 month premiums.
>> Imagine! if you save a 1000 per month, one spouse could EASILY stay
>> But...but...but the taxes! I will be taxed to death. Hogwash. No you
>> won't. [ ... ]
> To quote you, show references (not just Obama/Pelosi press releases).
> Money to pay for all that health care has to come from somewhere, and
> the only source of money the government has is taxpayers. That's also
> assuming there are any doctors left to provide the care.
> The quickest way to reduce the cost of health care is tort reform--
> which does not appear in the House-passed monstrosity based on all
I think I love you :-) No where in the health bill is tort reform
addressed, which is an absolute necessity. Also, I don't see personal
responsibility addressed. If some drug abuser or smoker or
non-compliant with medication person who decides not to follow
instructions, keeps coming to the ER for chest pain, etc., I don't want
to keep paying for that idiot's repeated stupidity.
From: Les Cargill on 9 Nov 2009 23:28
> Les Cargill wrote:
>> Vandy Terre wrote:
>>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:19:12 -0500, Les Cargill meals? For money
>>> spent I am getting more meals my way. This lets me feed four
>>> adults and two teenagers for about $400/ month by the time you add in
>>> vegetables/ bread.
>> Ah. There's the magic - four teenagers. Yes, my wife and I used to
>> do similar things when we had kids at home.
>>> It is your choice. It is your money. I am just showing part of my
>>> method of
>>> saving a little money and improving our lives.
>> I am not sure I could consume an entire turkey by myself in a year. I'm
>> in TDY status right now.
>> Les Cargill
> Huh? I think she said four ADULTS and two TEENAGERS.
Yes, he did. Point stands.
From: me on 10 Nov 2009 12:13
Balvenieman <balvenieman(a)invalid.net> wrote:
>Now, you know that isn't going to happen as long as the lawyers
>keep paying for the demogocrats' elections for them and as long as the
>demogocrats keep sucking up to the lawyers to get their elections paid
>for. You just like seeing the free lunch potatoheads get their panties
>all bunched up, don't you?
Hmmm.... seems to me like the Repubs had OVER 8
previous ears to do something abt healthcare and never
From: Cindy Hamilton on 10 Nov 2009 13:32
On Nov 9, 4:55 pm, Vandy Terre <va...(a)tanglewood-destiny.com> wrote:
> What is the point in life at all if no one has any children?
What is the point in life if you're reduced to your DNA?
> Without children there is not much future.
Globally, or locally? I think I can count on plenty of people to
keep the species going.
Or do you think that there's no future for oneself without
children? Nobody has a future beyond death.
> The species of humans would disappear if no one had
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Provided there are enough people around to ensure the
infrastructure that I desire, I don't care whether the human
race survives or not. Just don't all drop dead and leave
me to clean it up.
> No one should have children just to qualify for some government
> benefit. I wish parenting could be limited to only those who truly wish to have
> children because they enjoy teaching and raising those children.
I wish there were a parenting fitness test that had to be
passed before one could have children.
From: Coffee's For Closers on 10 Nov 2009 16:22
In article <etqef5983tu9a9nltleus744nvqpqbi2hh(a)4ax.com>,
> That is true. One parent should stay home with the children,
I've encountered some mothers who should have had jobs. Staying
home with the kids created a toxic fantasy world for them. They
(the mothers) never really matured, because they didn't have to
deal with other adults, and could engage in constant bullying
without consequences. They also lacked any understanding of the
connection between labour and money.
Those women were in deep trouble when middle-aged divorce forced
them to go out into the big, bad world and get jobs. Absolutely
flipping out, with the anger and self-pity off the scale.
The ones who remained married, simply remained immature and
ignorant, and very, very, boring.
The now-grown kids ended up permanently damaged, too.
> and it usually is more frugal than if both parents worked. I could never
> understand the obsession in America with the Two-Family income.
I could never understand why any adult should be enslaved to
support another adult who just doesn't feel like working. I've
never felt entitled to leech off of anyone.
> Plus, the savings on gas and car usage (you might even be able to have
> ONE CAR!). In addition, isn't time with your children priceless?
I find the freedom of NOT having kids to be priceless. And the
freedom of NOT being dependent upon a husband is also priceless.
> Two parents who work is not a frugal situation since all the extra money
> that is made is spent on childcare, babysitting, fast food, gas, car
> repairs, taxes, etc.
Kids simply aren't frugal, in any situation.
> People never think about that. I believe most
> people want to work to get away from their kids, which is strange,
> because why have kids in the first place if they're raised by
Because, when they decided to have the kids - or, rather, when
the kids just "happened" without serious consideration or
decision-making... the parents didn't know how annoying those
kids would be.
> >I see too many people playing the 'keep up with the Jones' game and needing to
> >work two jobs per adult to manage it. Where is the time to enjoy the extras
> >purchased with that income if you are working two jobs? Does the family really
> >_need_ that boat or four wheeler or expensive car?
There is also social pressure to be married and have kids. A lot
of this is based on envy from people who are trapped by those
things having "happened" without serious consideration or
> Imagine if America had socialized
> medicine, maybe, just maybe one parent might stay home to raise the
> kids. But probably not, Americans are selfish.
Using one's kids as a meal-ticket to avoid employment is selfish.
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum