It's old but pertinent to this years election. If you're considering furthuring your education check this out.
http://www.prospect.org/webfea....html
I knew I'd find this article again
I support the end of big government. Unfortunately, that leaves me with one candidate: Michael Badnarik.
But then, I live in a swing state now, disagree with Badnarik's foreign policy, and things get complicated. So I won't be voting for him, but like him anyway.http://www.badnarik.org/
But then, I live in a swing state now, disagree with Badnarik's foreign policy, and things get complicated. So I won't be voting for him, but like him anyway.http://www.badnarik.org/
-
SDRonEbay
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 7:04 am
- Car: Sold the hardbody but I've got a 93 Maxima that's under construction and working towards a Titan
- Contact:
Unfortunately, to properly deal with big government, we'd have to get rid of the small but powerful circle of businessmen and politicians that make up the innergovernment. To do that we have to pick and choose our battles on a systematic level. You seem to have the right notion about your Mr. Badnarik but since he's not a front runner that is almost a wasted vote.
Wasted votes are more dangerous to perserving our inalienable rights than not voting at all. Kind of like all the morons that voted for Al Sharpton. He's yet another tool, a pawn, used by that elite circle to keep control of the country. If we could all stand behind someone outside of that circle for once there might be some changes. I fear we no longer know the power of unity. It's great we have such a diverse political system, but it's worthless when there are so many distractions. I think Joseph Lieberman realized he was nothing more than a distraction in the last election and that was the truth behind his actions.
I just hope America can get together before the 2008 elections. I don't think we can live with Cheney for president.
Wasted votes are more dangerous to perserving our inalienable rights than not voting at all. Kind of like all the morons that voted for Al Sharpton. He's yet another tool, a pawn, used by that elite circle to keep control of the country. If we could all stand behind someone outside of that circle for once there might be some changes. I fear we no longer know the power of unity. It's great we have such a diverse political system, but it's worthless when there are so many distractions. I think Joseph Lieberman realized he was nothing more than a distraction in the last election and that was the truth behind his actions.
I just hope America can get together before the 2008 elections. I don't think we can live with Cheney for president.
Both parties are entrenched in special interests. Democrats have trial lawyers, international lobbies, and unions. Republicans have doctors and energy companies, both have defense contractors, and both gave no-bid contracts to Halliburton.
Its Big R and Big D taking money my away from me.
I'm in a swing state now. My vote has twice the efficacy of someone in Colorado. If I was still in Washington, where the Democrat always wins, I'd go with Badnarik. But now, I'm stuck with the outrageous spender vs. the more outrageous spender.
The debates -really- ticked me off, as both candidates preached new ways to blow my money on people who didn't earn it. And then they used labels to make the lesser spender look like a child-eating puppy kicker:"My opponent cut funding for X therefore he [hates the sick, hates the elderly, hates children, hates the poor, hates teachers, whatever]"Or they use spending increases to liken themselves to saints:"I increased spending on X therefore I care more about [old people, children, crippled spotted owls, etc]"
Theyre blowing our money on other people's interests to make themselves look like heros. Steal from the few, give to the many, and you're guaranteed reelection. Its a twisted self-perpetuating scheme.
-Jesda
Its Big R and Big D taking money my away from me.
I'm in a swing state now. My vote has twice the efficacy of someone in Colorado. If I was still in Washington, where the Democrat always wins, I'd go with Badnarik. But now, I'm stuck with the outrageous spender vs. the more outrageous spender.
The debates -really- ticked me off, as both candidates preached new ways to blow my money on people who didn't earn it. And then they used labels to make the lesser spender look like a child-eating puppy kicker:"My opponent cut funding for X therefore he [hates the sick, hates the elderly, hates children, hates the poor, hates teachers, whatever]"Or they use spending increases to liken themselves to saints:"I increased spending on X therefore I care more about [old people, children, crippled spotted owls, etc]"
Theyre blowing our money on other people's interests to make themselves look like heros. Steal from the few, give to the many, and you're guaranteed reelection. Its a twisted self-perpetuating scheme.
-Jesda
-
SDRonEbay
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 7:04 am
- Car: Sold the hardbody but I've got a 93 Maxima that's under construction and working towards a Titan
- Contact:
Re: (Jesda)
I feel you Jes, but I brought this back up because in all the debates, Bush's answer to unemployment, the deficit, and just about everything was his education bill. But his answer is to deny secondary education to the sector that needs it most.
I agree, the fruits of our labor has always gone to the government and the government has always misused it. I just happen to think that there are more unjust ways the money is being spent than furthering an impoverished child's education. The fact is the people who need that money can't rely on their parent's income; minimum wage is too low. They can't rely on grants; the economy is too weak. They can't rely on their own income; unemployment is at a high. Lord knows they can't rely on banks; that sector is high risk. So what else is there?
Lowering the cost of education isn't even an option because we'd lose too many teachers and programs for all students, financially assisted or not. Until this mess is cleaned up, I think we definitely need government assisted financial aid. I also think that the government should take the power from banks to determine who does and doesn't qualify for other types of federal loans.
It's time we stop relying on politicians to decide how much money we make, where our money goes and how our money is used. I think when we are sitting down to right out our yearly goals, we should include the following: "Work to achieve a level of existence that is not impaired, afflicted or dependent on or by the government or elected officials." It can be achieved and there are people out there right now who could care less about this election because it won't effect them one bit. I want to be one of those few.
I agree, the fruits of our labor has always gone to the government and the government has always misused it. I just happen to think that there are more unjust ways the money is being spent than furthering an impoverished child's education. The fact is the people who need that money can't rely on their parent's income; minimum wage is too low. They can't rely on grants; the economy is too weak. They can't rely on their own income; unemployment is at a high. Lord knows they can't rely on banks; that sector is high risk. So what else is there?
Lowering the cost of education isn't even an option because we'd lose too many teachers and programs for all students, financially assisted or not. Until this mess is cleaned up, I think we definitely need government assisted financial aid. I also think that the government should take the power from banks to determine who does and doesn't qualify for other types of federal loans.
It's time we stop relying on politicians to decide how much money we make, where our money goes and how our money is used. I think when we are sitting down to right out our yearly goals, we should include the following: "Work to achieve a level of existence that is not impaired, afflicted or dependent on or by the government or elected officials." It can be achieved and there are people out there right now who could care less about this election because it won't effect them one bit. I want to be one of those few.
Kerry is proposing spending that would create a deficit one trillion dollars greater than Bush's existing $3.2 trillion financial sinkhole. But relatively, its not much different.Its hard for people to pick the better of two, when youre choosing between feces and diarrhea for dinner.
Some say tax cuts will force future spending cuts, but I cant imagine this happening, as long as people love their free sh**.
When the government has an answer, the response is always "Im going to increase fund$ for the Department of Pajama Pants using money from John Doe." Of course, John has never worn pajama pants, and never will. Meanwhile, his neighbor across town is abusing government supplies of pajama pants, because he has no motive to earn a living and buy his own.
Point being, I dont want the government to have an answer to education, unemployment, etc. I want the answers to come from the private sector.
And I agree with you -- its time for the private and public sector to take their hands out of each other's pockets.
Some say tax cuts will force future spending cuts, but I cant imagine this happening, as long as people love their free sh**.
When the government has an answer, the response is always "Im going to increase fund$ for the Department of Pajama Pants using money from John Doe." Of course, John has never worn pajama pants, and never will. Meanwhile, his neighbor across town is abusing government supplies of pajama pants, because he has no motive to earn a living and buy his own.
Point being, I dont want the government to have an answer to education, unemployment, etc. I want the answers to come from the private sector.
And I agree with you -- its time for the private and public sector to take their hands out of each other's pockets.
-
SDRonEbay
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 7:04 am
- Car: Sold the hardbody but I've got a 93 Maxima that's under construction and working towards a Titan
- Contact:
Re: (Jesda)
LMFAO @ Department of Pajama Pants
I know now we're on the same level. When I start my empire, I want you on my side. I just wish others had joined this one.
If anyone ever gives you problems...come get me. You're alright.
I know now we're on the same level. When I start my empire, I want you on my side. I just wish others had joined this one.
If anyone ever gives you problems...come get me. You're alright.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54542
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
I'd back Jesda for public office in a heartbeat, with Jayson as the Minister of Quit Whining.
When people start relying on their neighbors, their church, their local civic groups and their families for support and assistance, we'll have accomplished something.
Until then, the question, "Who's your daddy?" will always be answered with "The Man". And that ain't right.
Big government (and its myriad of self-serving, poorly-administered programs) SUCKS.
When people start relying on their neighbors, their church, their local civic groups and their families for support and assistance, we'll have accomplished something.
Until then, the question, "Who's your daddy?" will always be answered with "The Man". And that ain't right.
Big government (and its myriad of self-serving, poorly-administered programs) SUCKS.
-
SDRonEbay
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 7:04 am
- Car: Sold the hardbody but I've got a 93 Maxima that's under construction and working towards a Titan
- Contact:
Re: (AZhitman)
Cool, a cabinet position!
If it'll get me more votes, check out the article written by June Kronholz for the Wall Street Journal. Oct. 20
One of the most dramatic statements is, "When room and board, books, transportation and other expenses are added in, a year at a public university costs $14,640 this year, while the bill at a private school will come to $30,295."
In NICO terms, for public college grads, they're basically buying a new Sentra every year (discounts and rebates applied). For the private college grads, a 350Z.
If it'll get me more votes, check out the article written by June Kronholz for the Wall Street Journal. Oct. 20
One of the most dramatic statements is, "When room and board, books, transportation and other expenses are added in, a year at a public university costs $14,640 this year, while the bill at a private school will come to $30,295."
In NICO terms, for public college grads, they're basically buying a new Sentra every year (discounts and rebates applied). For the private college grads, a 350Z.
-
Rockenreno
- Posts: 2891
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 5:48 pm
- Car: 1997 BMW M3
- Contact:
Re: (JaysonReliford)
I'll second Hitman's nominations. I don't know who to vote for because I hate both major candidates and don't know anything about the others. I've got my absentee ballot sitting here, but the president field might be left blank unless someone starts making sense.
Not that it matters since Kerry (all Democrats really) have CA in their pocket.
Not that it matters since Kerry (all Democrats really) have CA in their pocket.
Your state is going Kerry no matter what. Voting third party cant hurt.
Check out Michael Badnarik.http://www.badnarik.org
Check out Michael Badnarik.http://www.badnarik.org
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
Wow, good stuff guys!
<BACK ON TOPIC>
The only thing I would add, is that I think it's okay to deny aid to drug offenders. Who else is punishing them? The courts... NO, they get off with a slap on the wrist. Their parents... hahahah NO!
Taxes and government aid both have dual-purposes. One generates revenue and shapes behavior, the other spends money and shapes behavior. If some "low income minority" youth (just focusing on the ONLY people the article seems to think this would impact) knows that his only chance of going to college is going up in smoke as he puffs on his pot pipe (or worse), he may think twice.
The fact is most these kids have no incentive to go to college, because they can have a much more lucrative career selling crack. Hey, here's a better idea, instead of blaming the government for taking away their financial aid, blame the kids for selling drugs (or maybe their parents)! The government is trying to give them an incentive to follow the rules of society.
Maybe I'm an insensitive rightwing nut case, but I have NO pity for whiners like this. If a convicted drug user or dealer has their panties in a bunch because the government won't give them some money for school... well I guess they should have thought about that before they CHOSE to commit a crime. I'm all about giving people a second chance, that's how this legislation is set up. One offense means you put off school for a year... as a PUNISHMENT! (Contrary to liberal belief... it is OKAY to punish someone!!!!) But if you screw up again... tough ****... you're out of luck. Go sell some more crack... that should pay your way through school if you REALLY wanted to go.
<BACK ON TOPIC>
The only thing I would add, is that I think it's okay to deny aid to drug offenders. Who else is punishing them? The courts... NO, they get off with a slap on the wrist. Their parents... hahahah NO!
Taxes and government aid both have dual-purposes. One generates revenue and shapes behavior, the other spends money and shapes behavior. If some "low income minority" youth (just focusing on the ONLY people the article seems to think this would impact) knows that his only chance of going to college is going up in smoke as he puffs on his pot pipe (or worse), he may think twice.
The fact is most these kids have no incentive to go to college, because they can have a much more lucrative career selling crack. Hey, here's a better idea, instead of blaming the government for taking away their financial aid, blame the kids for selling drugs (or maybe their parents)! The government is trying to give them an incentive to follow the rules of society.
Maybe I'm an insensitive rightwing nut case, but I have NO pity for whiners like this. If a convicted drug user or dealer has their panties in a bunch because the government won't give them some money for school... well I guess they should have thought about that before they CHOSE to commit a crime. I'm all about giving people a second chance, that's how this legislation is set up. One offense means you put off school for a year... as a PUNISHMENT! (Contrary to liberal belief... it is OKAY to punish someone!!!!) But if you screw up again... tough ****... you're out of luck. Go sell some more crack... that should pay your way through school if you REALLY wanted to go.