[kdbrich]

blah blah blah "Bush tax cuts" blah blah blah

Come on people. Get a new argument already.

The biggest problem is not taxes--it's our politicians thinking they can spend so much. This is a republican issue as well as democrat. When they couldn't pass the $700 billion dollar buyout, what did they do? We saw Nancy Pelosi on tv whining about George Bush's failed policies....blah blah blah...let's spend spend spend. Then they went back in and tacked on $100 billion dollars (local rep Lee Terry included) and passed the bigger, more bloated one.

As for people losing their homes? I'm fully aware there are exceptions to the rule. I honestly sympathize with them..but is it the taxpayers' faults they made bad decisions and bought homes they couldn't afford? I don't mean to sound insensitive here, but we can't keep rescuing people from their own bad judgment.

Now that they're talking about bailing out GM, should I rush out and buy a car I can't afford, hoping that in a few months the government will step in and give GM the money to refinance me?

At what point do we have to tell people to live with the consequences of what they did? Where is the personal responsibility in this?

[2Adam29]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

blah blah blah "Bush tax cuts" blah blah blah

Come on people. Get a new argument already.

The biggest problem is not taxes--it's our politicians thinking they can spend so much. This is a republican issue as well as democrat. When they couldn't pass the $700 billion dollar buyout, what did they do? We saw Nancy Pelosi on tv whining about George Bush's failed policies....blah blah blah...let's spend spend spend. Then they went back in and tacked on $100 billion dollars (local rep Lee Terry included) and passed the bigger, more bloated one.

As for people losing their homes? I'm fully aware there are exceptions to the rule. I honestly sympathize with them..but is it the taxpayers' faults they made bad decisions and bought homes they couldn't afford? I don't mean to sound insensitive here, but we can't keep rescuing people from their own bad judgment.

Now that they're talking about bailing out GM, should I rush out and buy a car I can't afford, hoping that in a few months the government will step in and give GM the money to refinance me?

At what point do we have to tell people to live with the consequences of what they did? Where is the personal responsibility in this?

it's not perfect, but everything I've heard said that if this plan goes as expected, Taxpayers will gain money in the long run, when companies are forced to pay back their bailout package with interest.
McCain was the biggest supporter of irresponsibility, he wanted to buy up mortgages while Obama simply wanted to put a moratorium on foreclosers to help people catch up on their payments.

that's what I heard anyway...

[Todd4]

kdbrich said:
Look...fact of the matter is, I was unemployed for about 6 months in 2001. I'm not ashamed to admit we took advantage of WIC and they bought my kid formula, and the state bought her hearing aids.

I had to use a Pell Grant for my freshman year of college. For that reason, and many more, I will never vote Republican because I would have been unable to attend college without this Democratic "big government" program under the Republicans survival of the richest ideology.

For you to use WIC and then state time and again throughout these threads that you don't like "big government" programs is pretty cruel.

To me, it's like saying, "It was good enough for me to use this big government program when I needed it, but not for anybody else."

How can you justify not being a democrat when you used resources that wouldn't exist without democratic law makers belief that wealthier people's tax dollars should help the less fortunate by funding these programs ?

[kdbrich]

2Adam29: You're right. McCain is not exactly a "small government guy". I'm not a big fan of his.

Todd4: I don't have a problem with people using programs they need. My dad also attended school on a pell grant 20 years ago when he was laid off of his job. Yes, the programs are good when they're not abused.

I'm not talking about pell grants and WIC. If they're not abused, they are a good thing.

I'm talking about the bailout of people who bought houses that they knew they could not afford.

[Todd4]

Now that they're talking about bailing out GM, should I rush out and buy a car I can't afford, hoping that in a few months the government will step in and give GM the money to refinance me?


HA ! I think we might agree on something !!

This GM bailout is probably the worst idea I have ever heard. Are they going to give them $25 billion to keep producing low mpg cars that no one wants to buy ?

Do they just give them the $$$ and let them keep the same incompetent executives that let Toyota become the largest car company in the world ?

This makes no sense to me. It is a specific company, like white house press sec. Perino said:, "has made poor business decisions that led to this"

Unless the government requires higher fuel efficiency and new execs., this is bad.

Where does it end ? Does that mean they will bail out a Omaha restaurant because it's failing ?

[Todd4]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

2Adam29: You're right. McCain is not exactly a "small government guy". I'm not a big fan of his.

Todd4: I don't have a problem with people using programs they need. My dad also attended school on a pell grant 20 years ago when he was laid off of his job. Yes, the programs are good when they're not abused.

I'm not talking about pell grants and WIC. If they're not abused, they are a good thing.

I'm talking about the bailout of people who bought houses that they knew they could not afford.

yeah, but you have said throughout your arguments that "big government" is not the answer and that is part of why you don't like the democrats.

a "nanny state" is what you called it i believe.

you were talking about social programs and not the bailout situation.

[Todd4]

Omaha made the front page of the New York Times this morning ::

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/us...hp&oref=slogin

[kdbrich]

Originally Posted by Todd4

yeah, but you have said throughout your arguments that "big government" is not the answer and that is part of why you don't like the democrats.

a "nanny state" is what you called it i believe.

you were talking about social programs and not the bailout situation.

Both, actually.

I have an issue with a lot of big programs. Some are needed--I've always said that. I don't like an overabundance of them--and I don't believe that obama's tax credit plan is going to work.

[Todd4]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

Both, actually.

I have an issue with a lot of big programs. Some are needed--I've always said that. I don't like an overabundance of them--and I don't believe that obama's tax credit plan is going to work.

How can you determine what "overabundance" of social programs are ?

Do you just keep ones that have benefited you ?

I just think it's a not very well thought out argument when people say that "big government" doesn't work.

[kdbrich]

I consider needless tax rebates to people that don't pay taxes to be "overabundance". Or too much regulation. Or tax dollars going to stuff like planned parenthood.