100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Let's talk about the problem... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
mightymoe said... shareholders are not designed to lose money... if a business is fined, they just raise prices so that the only people losing is the consumers... And when the value of their shares go down, they lose money, right? Not actual paper money, but their money on paper goes down. from what i have seen, not that i am any expert on it, but that is usually political posturing... when the ceo of hewitt packard was fired, the next day the shares went up by 30% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
along your lines of reasoning here, when your paying taxes, it is their money, not yours, the same exact thing your saying about paychecks... No, because we are their employers. They get a paycheck, which we don't have the right to know how they spend. They have the duty to spend the Government's budget responsibly and we have every right to know that they have. If my boss said "What have you been doing today", I would have to tell him, right? That's what we need to be able to do to our Government. and just who would answer that? does one person in the government know? how many different parts and divisions in the government are there? does the right hand know what the left hand is doing? any answer you get would be a lie, because there is no way to know... Right now, I think it would take a team months to figure it out. If we shrink the government, eliminate waste, eliminate many or the departments and the "functions" they serve, then it would be easy. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Redykeulous
on
Sun 07/17/11 09:32 PM
|
|
The housing bubble had regulations, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of loans that actually followed the regulations were not the ones that initially defaulted causing the collapse. Now, it's been a while since I looked at the numbers, so they may have changed in the past couple years. But the collapse itself did not begin from loans following the regs. Greed and the quick profit regardless of the consequences... no accountability. That was the problem. Some loan officers, and many if not most mortgage brokers, knowingly offered unqualified citizens a mortgage that they would never be able to afford. So, because they recognized this very high probability for default, they began selling those bad loans to hedge fund managers who again sold the bad loans on the market. All the while making money hand over fist. The loans went into default... as expected, the shareholders went belly up, the undisciplined banks went belly up, and the merchants walked away with incredible profits and no accountability. That was the problem. There was no vested interest in the success of the loans to begin with by those who were setting them up. Very true ... and irresponsible. But wouldn't it have made more sense to invest the $800+Billion in bailout dollars in the families ... how would things look different if instead of bailing out Freddie and Fanny ... they bailed out the families. Families would still be in their homes ... Freddie and Fannie would have stayed in business because people would have been able to pay their mortgages... Call me simplistic ... but it makes sense to me ... The bail out has been a lie and a fraud. The bail out should not have been necessary and the money should have gone to the people through the FDIC when the banks failed. When the banks failed their assets, the mortagaes, should have been sold, at a discount, to those banks that DID NOT FAIL. During the interrim payments that were missed by property owners should have been forgiven until such time as the new mortgage terms were worked out. Those who were in charge of the failed banks should have been held legally responsible for breaches in federal regulations, misconduct, and properly tried and made to pay restitution if found guilty of the charges brought against them. We, as citizens, are not allowed to use ignorance of the law as a defense, nor should the elite who ran the failed organizations be allowed to say "but everyone else was doing it".... If the chain of misconduct created a path to the Federal Reserve, or to any member of a state or our Federal Government, the individuals involved should likewise have been charged and tried. Certainly the FDIC funding would not have been sufficient to cover all the losses, but isn't that the reason for selling the banks assets? Isn't that the reason for trying those responsible and demanding restitution in cases of guilt. If that had occurred, many smaller and sound financial organizations would have increased - and would require new employees (those who might have lost their jobs from the failed orgs perhaps). More people would have suffered far less financial loss and those in retirement might have been able to stay in retirment. Losses of pensions/401k s/IRA s, etc would not have some sort of reimbursement and retirement for many would still be secured. More homeowners would have had the second chance they needed. More jobs would have been saved, and with more money at their disposal, some people may have taken avantage of the situtuation by starting their own small busniness, adding more job opportunities. So why where the financial institutuions not allowed to fail? Why is the pathway of these failures dimmed by a mass bailout? And why have we been told it was to save the economy? With a cool head I have to wonder - are the American people not part of its own 'economy'? The government has told the media and the media regurgitates without fail the story that the 'recession' ended two years ago, and the bail out worked. But who did it work for, who is 'the economy'? Who has been charged with misconduct, who has been brought to trial? What restitution has been received and by whom? If the financial institutuions are currently profitiable BECAUSE of the bail out - why are THEY not RESPONSIBLE for paying that debt back? Why are is the workforce present & future, being strapped with this debt, with no reason why? Who is 'the economy'? Who is the workforce? What is nationalism and when did it cease to be a blanket we shared with capitalism? Did we ever share the same blanket, the same ideals as a people, as a nation? A lot of questions that we have to ask but we can't know ourself without reflection and who we are must be part of a society of people greater than the individual that we would hail as being free. Freedom requires labor, equality, opportunity, responsibility of action, and respect for human rights. Unless we seek these things for all people, we are not free we are capitalists who are individuals feeding off the apathy, of the divided unions of the world. - Why are we at war? - lots of questions that demand a lot of time, a lot of research, and for some - a lot of learning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
along your lines of reasoning here, when your paying taxes, it is their money, not yours, the same exact thing your saying about paychecks... No, because we are their employers. They get a paycheck, which we don't have the right to know how they spend. They have the duty to spend the Government's budget responsibly and we have every right to know that they have. If my boss said "What have you been doing today", I would have to tell him, right? That's what we need to be able to do to our Government. and just who would answer that? does one person in the government know? how many different parts and divisions in the government are there? does the right hand know what the left hand is doing? any answer you get would be a lie, because there is no way to know... Right now, I think it would take a team months to figure it out. If we shrink the government, eliminate waste, eliminate many or the departments and the "functions" they serve, then it would be easy. agreed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... They already do that anyway! So your analogy doesn't work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mightymoe said... shareholders are not designed to lose money... if a business is fined, they just raise prices so that the only people losing is the consumers... And when the value of their shares go down, they lose money, right? Not actual paper money, but their money on paper goes down. from what i have seen, not that i am any expert on it, but that is usually political posturing... when the ceo of hewitt packard was fired, the next day the shares went up by 30% http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/hp-ceo-mark-hurd-resigns-_n_673858.html No, they went down by 9.7%. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The housing bubble had regulations, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of loans that actually followed the regulations were not the ones that initially defaulted causing the collapse. Now, it's been a while since I looked at the numbers, so they may have changed in the past couple years. But the collapse itself did not begin from loans following the regs. Greed and the quick profit regardless of the consequences... no accountability. That was the problem. Some loan officers, and many if not most mortgage brokers, knowingly offered unqualified citizens a mortgage that they would never be able to afford. So, because they recognized this very high probability for default, they began selling those bad loans to hedge fund managers who again sold the bad loans on the market. All the while making money hand over fist. The loans went into default... as expected, the shareholders went belly up, the undisciplined banks went belly up, and the merchants walked away with incredible profits and no accountability. That was the problem. There was no vested interest in the success of the loans to begin with by those who were setting them up. Very true ... and irresponsible. But wouldn't it have made more sense to invest the $800+Billion in bailout dollars in the families ... how would things look different if instead of bailing out Freddie and Fanny ... they bailed out the families. Families would still be in their homes ... Freddie and Fannie would have stayed in business because people would have been able to pay their mortgages... Call me simplistic ... but it makes sense to me ... The bail out has been a lie and a fraud. The bail out should not have been necessary and the money should have gone to the people through the FDIC when the banks failed. When the banks failed their assets, the mortagaes, should have been sold, at a discount, to those banks that DID NOT FAIL. During the interrim payments that were missed by property owners should have been forgiven until such time as the new mortgage terms were worked out. Those who were in charge of the failed banks should have been held legally responsible for breaches in federal regulations, misconduct, and properly tried and made to pay restitution if found guilty of the charges brought against them. We, as citizens, are not allowed to use ignorance of the law as a defense, nor should the elite who ran the failed organizations be allowed to say "but everyone else was doing it".... If the chain of misconduct created a path to the Federal Reserve, or to any member of a state or our Federal Government, the individuals involved should likewise have been charged and tried. Certainly the FDIC funding would not have been sufficient to cover all the losses, but isn't that the reason for selling the banks assets? Isn't that the reason for trying those responsible and demanding restitution in cases of guilt. If that had occurred, many smaller and sound financial organizations would have increased - and would require new employees (those who might have lost their jobs from the failed orgs perhaps). More people would have suffered far less financial loss and those in retirement might have been able to stay in retirment. Losses of pensions/401k s/IRA s, etc would not have some sort of reimbursement and retirement for many would still be secured. More homeowners would have had the second chance they needed. More jobs would have been saved, and with more money at their disposal, some people may have taken avantage of the situtuation by starting their own small busniness, adding more job opportunities. So why where the financial institutuions not allowed to fail? Why is the pathway of these failures dimmed by a mass bailout? And why have we been told it was to save the economy? With a cool head I have to wonder - are the American people not part of its own 'economy'? The government has told the media and the media regurgitates without fail the story that the 'recession' ended two years ago, and the bail out worked. But who did it work for, who is 'the economy'? Who has been charged with misconduct, who has been brought to trial? What restitution has been received and by whom? If the financial institutuions are currently profitiable BECAUSE of the bail out - why are THEY not RESPONSIBLE for paying that debt back? Why are is the workforce present & future, being strapped with this debt, with no reason why? Who is 'the economy'? Who is the workforce? What is nationalism and when did it cease to be a blanket we shared with capitalism? Did we ever share the same blanket, the same ideals as a people, as a nation? A lot of questions that we have to ask but we can't know ourself without reflection and who we are must be part of a society of people greater than the individual that we would hail as being free. Freedom requires labor, equality, opportunity, responsibility of action, and respect for human rights. Unless we seek these things for all people, we are not free we are capitalists who are individuals feeding off the apathy, of the divided unions of the world. - Why are we at war? - lots of questions that demand a lot of time, a lot of research, and for some - a lot of learning. http://beforeitsnews.com/story/829/112/A_Brief_History_of_the_Obama_National_Debt.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Sun 07/17/11 09:46 PM
|
|
mightymoe said... shareholders are not designed to lose money... if a business is fined, they just raise prices so that the only people losing is the consumers... And when the value of their shares go down, they lose money, right? Not actual paper money, but their money on paper goes down. from what i have seen, not that i am any expert on it, but that is usually political posturing... when the ceo of hewitt packard was fired, the next day the shares went up by 30% http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/hp-ceo-mark-hurd-resigns-_n_673858.html No, they went down by 9.7%. thats not what i was talking about, but it is the same point... http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/09/technology/hp_fiorina/index.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... It's not about voting, it's about making our representitives responsible to the people. That means WE must take some kind of action to assure that we are being represented according to our needs. We don't do that by voting, we do that by making our demands known through our voices and our presence. When you vote for any office - how many poeple are on the ballod? Who put them there? So does it matter who wins? What matters? What matters is what we do AFTER those who win have taken office. Do you know there is a whole department in the Federal Govenenment devoted to ETHICS? Do you know when the last time was that this department filed a grievance agains anyone? Do you know the budget for this department? Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The housing bubble had regulations, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of loans that actually followed the regulations were not the ones that initially defaulted causing the collapse. Now, it's been a while since I looked at the numbers, so they may have changed in the past couple years. But the collapse itself did not begin from loans following the regs. Greed and the quick profit regardless of the consequences... no accountability. That was the problem. Some loan officers, and many if not most mortgage brokers, knowingly offered unqualified citizens a mortgage that they would never be able to afford. So, because they recognized this very high probability for default, they began selling those bad loans to hedge fund managers who again sold the bad loans on the market. All the while making money hand over fist. The loans went into default... as expected, the shareholders went belly up, the undisciplined banks went belly up, and the merchants walked away with incredible profits and no accountability. That was the problem. There was no vested interest in the success of the loans to begin with by those who were setting them up. Very true ... and irresponsible. But wouldn't it have made more sense to invest the $800+Billion in bailout dollars in the families ... how would things look different if instead of bailing out Freddie and Fanny ... they bailed out the families. Families would still be in their homes ... Freddie and Fannie would have stayed in business because people would have been able to pay their mortgages... Call me simplistic ... but it makes sense to me ... The bail out has been a lie and a fraud. The bail out should not have been necessary and the money should have gone to the people through the FDIC when the banks failed. When the banks failed their assets, the mortagaes, should have been sold, at a discount, to those banks that DID NOT FAIL. During the interrim payments that were missed by property owners should have been forgiven until such time as the new mortgage terms were worked out. Those who were in charge of the failed banks should have been held legally responsible for breaches in federal regulations, misconduct, and properly tried and made to pay restitution if found guilty of the charges brought against them. We, as citizens, are not allowed to use ignorance of the law as a defense, nor should the elite who ran the failed organizations be allowed to say "but everyone else was doing it".... If the chain of misconduct created a path to the Federal Reserve, or to any member of a state or our Federal Government, the individuals involved should likewise have been charged and tried. Certainly the FDIC funding would not have been sufficient to cover all the losses, but isn't that the reason for selling the banks assets? Isn't that the reason for trying those responsible and demanding restitution in cases of guilt. If that had occurred, many smaller and sound financial organizations would have increased - and would require new employees (those who might have lost their jobs from the failed orgs perhaps). More people would have suffered far less financial loss and those in retirement might have been able to stay in retirment. Losses of pensions/401k s/IRA s, etc would not have some sort of reimbursement and retirement for many would still be secured. More homeowners would have had the second chance they needed. More jobs would have been saved, and with more money at their disposal, some people may have taken avantage of the situtuation by starting their own small busniness, adding more job opportunities. So why where the financial institutuions not allowed to fail? Why is the pathway of these failures dimmed by a mass bailout? And why have we been told it was to save the economy? With a cool head I have to wonder - are the American people not part of its own 'economy'? The government has told the media and the media regurgitates without fail the story that the 'recession' ended two years ago, and the bail out worked. But who did it work for, who is 'the economy'? Who has been charged with misconduct, who has been brought to trial? What restitution has been received and by whom? If the financial institutuions are currently profitiable BECAUSE of the bail out - why are THEY not RESPONSIBLE for paying that debt back? Why are is the workforce present & future, being strapped with this debt, with no reason why? Who is 'the economy'? Who is the workforce? What is nationalism and when did it cease to be a blanket we shared with capitalism? Did we ever share the same blanket, the same ideals as a people, as a nation? A lot of questions that we have to ask but we can't know ourself without reflection and who we are must be part of a society of people greater than the individual that we would hail as being free. Freedom requires labor, equality, opportunity, responsibility of action, and respect for human rights. Unless we seek these things for all people, we are not free we are capitalists who are individuals feeding off the apathy, of the divided unions of the world. - Why are we at war? - lots of questions that demand a lot of time, a lot of research, and for some - a lot of learning. http://beforeitsnews.com/story/829/112/A_Brief_History_of_the_Obama_National_Debt.html Did you have a point to make - I really don't want to guess. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The housing bubble had regulations, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of loans that actually followed the regulations were not the ones that initially defaulted causing the collapse. Now, it's been a while since I looked at the numbers, so they may have changed in the past couple years. But the collapse itself did not begin from loans following the regs. Greed and the quick profit regardless of the consequences... no accountability. That was the problem. Some loan officers, and many if not most mortgage brokers, knowingly offered unqualified citizens a mortgage that they would never be able to afford. So, because they recognized this very high probability for default, they began selling those bad loans to hedge fund managers who again sold the bad loans on the market. All the while making money hand over fist. The loans went into default... as expected, the shareholders went belly up, the undisciplined banks went belly up, and the merchants walked away with incredible profits and no accountability. That was the problem. There was no vested interest in the success of the loans to begin with by those who were setting them up. Very true ... and irresponsible. But wouldn't it have made more sense to invest the $800+Billion in bailout dollars in the families ... how would things look different if instead of bailing out Freddie and Fanny ... they bailed out the families. Families would still be in their homes ... Freddie and Fannie would have stayed in business because people would have been able to pay their mortgages... Call me simplistic ... but it makes sense to me ... The bail out has been a lie and a fraud. The bail out should not have been necessary and the money should have gone to the people through the FDIC when the banks failed. When the banks failed their assets, the mortagaes, should have been sold, at a discount, to those banks that DID NOT FAIL. During the interrim payments that were missed by property owners should have been forgiven until such time as the new mortgage terms were worked out. Those who were in charge of the failed banks should have been held legally responsible for breaches in federal regulations, misconduct, and properly tried and made to pay restitution if found guilty of the charges brought against them. We, as citizens, are not allowed to use ignorance of the law as a defense, nor should the elite who ran the failed organizations be allowed to say "but everyone else was doing it".... If the chain of misconduct created a path to the Federal Reserve, or to any member of a state or our Federal Government, the individuals involved should likewise have been charged and tried. Certainly the FDIC funding would not have been sufficient to cover all the losses, but isn't that the reason for selling the banks assets? Isn't that the reason for trying those responsible and demanding restitution in cases of guilt. If that had occurred, many smaller and sound financial organizations would have increased - and would require new employees (those who might have lost their jobs from the failed orgs perhaps). More people would have suffered far less financial loss and those in retirement might have been able to stay in retirment. Losses of pensions/401k s/IRA s, etc would not have some sort of reimbursement and retirement for many would still be secured. More homeowners would have had the second chance they needed. More jobs would have been saved, and with more money at their disposal, some people may have taken avantage of the situtuation by starting their own small busniness, adding more job opportunities. So why where the financial institutuions not allowed to fail? Why is the pathway of these failures dimmed by a mass bailout? And why have we been told it was to save the economy? With a cool head I have to wonder - are the American people not part of its own 'economy'? The government has told the media and the media regurgitates without fail the story that the 'recession' ended two years ago, and the bail out worked. But who did it work for, who is 'the economy'? Who has been charged with misconduct, who has been brought to trial? What restitution has been received and by whom? If the financial institutuions are currently profitiable BECAUSE of the bail out - why are THEY not RESPONSIBLE for paying that debt back? Why are is the workforce present & future, being strapped with this debt, with no reason why? Who is 'the economy'? Who is the workforce? What is nationalism and when did it cease to be a blanket we shared with capitalism? Did we ever share the same blanket, the same ideals as a people, as a nation? A lot of questions that we have to ask but we can't know ourself without reflection and who we are must be part of a society of people greater than the individual that we would hail as being free. Freedom requires labor, equality, opportunity, responsibility of action, and respect for human rights. Unless we seek these things for all people, we are not free we are capitalists who are individuals feeding off the apathy, of the divided unions of the world. - Why are we at war? - lots of questions that demand a lot of time, a lot of research, and for some - a lot of learning. http://beforeitsnews.com/story/829/112/A_Brief_History_of_the_Obama_National_Debt.html Did you have a point to make - I really don't want to guess. you know what my point is... obama and the lefties are losers... you knew that before you asked... but feel free to make your own points... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... It's not about voting, it's about making our representitives responsible to the people. That means WE must take some kind of action to assure that we are being represented according to our needs. We don't do that by voting, we do that by making our demands known through our voices and our presence. When you vote for any office - how many poeple are on the ballod? Who put them there? So does it matter who wins? What matters? What matters is what we do AFTER those who win have taken office. Do you know there is a whole department in the Federal Govenenment devoted to ETHICS? Do you know when the last time was that this department filed a grievance agains anyone? Do you know the budget for this department? Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? i disagree, i think voting is the main issue... what backs up your demands for the people in office? voting them out in the next election... thats the only thing they fear... and these questions your asking me, why would i know the answer to any of them? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? Education or the lack there of is how they have kept all their power. Be it by our unwillingness to get educated, or just not being educated in general. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... They already do that anyway! So your analogy doesn't work. lol, and why is that so? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? Private schools out perform public schools for an average of 40% less money per student. Do you support vouchers or do you think we should put more money into Public Education? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... It's not about voting, it's about making our representitives responsible to the people. That means WE must take some kind of action to assure that we are being represented according to our needs. We don't do that by voting, we do that by making our demands known through our voices and our presence. When you vote for any office - how many poeple are on the ballod? Who put them there? So does it matter who wins? What matters? What matters is what we do AFTER those who win have taken office. Do you know there is a whole department in the Federal Govenenment devoted to ETHICS? Do you know when the last time was that this department filed a grievance agains anyone? Do you know the budget for this department? Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? i disagree, i think voting is the main issue... what backs up your demands for the people in office? voting them out in the next election... thats the only thing they fear... and these questions your asking me, why would i know the answer to any of them? First of all, if voting really did anything then why do things just keep getting progressively worse, why does inflation keep going up, why do taxes keep going up, etc etc etc? If voting changed a damn thing the facts would prove it, but the facts prove the opposite. It matters not who is in office, things stay the same, the rich get richer and more powerful, and the poor and middle class become less so. Been like that for a long time. Second, your saying you don't know the answer to any of her questions just proves her point. The government preys upon the ignorance of its' citizens. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... They already do that anyway! So your analogy doesn't work. lol, and why is that so? Because we supposedly have a voice, but they do whatever they hell they want anyway, like passing a corrupted healthcare bill down everyone's throats. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... It's not about voting, it's about making our representitives responsible to the people. That means WE must take some kind of action to assure that we are being represented according to our needs. We don't do that by voting, we do that by making our demands known through our voices and our presence. When you vote for any office - how many poeple are on the ballod? Who put them there? So does it matter who wins? What matters? What matters is what we do AFTER those who win have taken office. Do you know there is a whole department in the Federal Govenenment devoted to ETHICS? Do you know when the last time was that this department filed a grievance agains anyone? Do you know the budget for this department? Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? i disagree, i think voting is the main issue... what backs up your demands for the people in office? voting them out in the next election... thats the only thing they fear... and these questions your asking me, why would i know the answer to any of them? First of all, if voting really did anything then why do things just keep getting progressively worse, why does inflation keep going up, why do taxes keep going up, etc etc etc? If voting changed a damn thing the facts would prove it, but the facts prove the opposite. It matters not who is in office, things stay the same, the rich get richer and more powerful, and the poor and middle class become less so. Been like that for a long time. Second, your saying you don't know the answer to any of her questions just proves her point. The government preys upon the ignorance of its' citizens. i don't have those answers, but if nobody voted, it will get worse... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
does your boss require absolute proof were you are spending your paycheck? do you require absolute proof where the grocery store is spending the money you spend there? why is where the government spends money any of your business? i mean, everyone else lies about what they are spending money on, but your only mad at the government? and with all the spending the government does, just how big would this list be? face it, the government doesn't owe us any explanations on things that are none of our business... do you think they should tell us they are spending money on top secret projects? Your paycheck is your money, not your employers. Taxes are the individuals money taken to support the society. The citizens should have the right to know, as members of the society, how their tax money is being spent. Sunshine laws were enacted to give us greater access to government meetings. We need transparency laws that will require budgetary transparency. I don't expect that military and intelligence community spending could be entirely transparent, but the rest of the Government should be. thats why there is a voting system, so you can vote for people to spend the money more closely to how you want... but no 1 person can say what the government is spending money on, that is just impossible... Yeah and the voting system is a joke too. Our votes mean about as much a piece of fluff on a suit, that is to say, not very much. And it's no more impossible than to ask us to try and understand a "law" the size of a damn dictionary. You wanna talk impossible? That would about be it. quit voting for lawyers then.... I don't vote anymore, I think it's meaningless quite frankly. The whole thing is rigged, and we're all the losers. then your a big part of the problem your crying about here... if nobody voted, the government can do what it wants... Actually if no one voted, their system of control would collapse. Or better yet, if people stopped voting for either party, and voted Independent instead. The whole two party system is how they have gained all this power, making it seem like that's the only choice (which is really two sides of the same coin), when it's not. It's much like if everyone stopped paying taxes. They need us a lot more than we need them. i would say your very wrong there... if nobody was voting, they could establish any law they wanted, get anyone in office they wanted, and do anything they wanted because the votes against it would not be there.. think about it... It's not about voting, it's about making our representitives responsible to the people. That means WE must take some kind of action to assure that we are being represented according to our needs. We don't do that by voting, we do that by making our demands known through our voices and our presence. When you vote for any office - how many poeple are on the ballod? Who put them there? So does it matter who wins? What matters? What matters is what we do AFTER those who win have taken office. Do you know there is a whole department in the Federal Govenenment devoted to ETHICS? Do you know when the last time was that this department filed a grievance agains anyone? Do you know the budget for this department? Speaking of education - how much do you think the average high school senior knows about the governenace of their state and of their nation? How much do you know? i disagree, i think voting is the main issue... what backs up your demands for the people in office? voting them out in the next election... thats the only thing they fear... and these questions your asking me, why would i know the answer to any of them? First of all, if voting really did anything then why do things just keep getting progressively worse, why does inflation keep going up, why do taxes keep going up, etc etc etc? If voting changed a damn thing the facts would prove it, but the facts prove the opposite. It matters not who is in office, things stay the same, the rich get richer and more powerful, and the poor and middle class become less so. Been like that for a long time. Second, your saying you don't know the answer to any of her questions just proves her point. The government preys upon the ignorance of its' citizens. i agree.. but what are we to be educated on? the government is a vast concept to grasp, as big and complex as it is... |
|
|
|
|
