Why don't the democrats just go to jails, slums, unemployment lines, and crack houses and just give them their money directly. Those of us who don't want to pay people to take drugs and not work won't have to. And those who do will be able to cut out a middle man. Isn't the US about choice?
2007-08-16 09:31:58 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
LOL. That's right, that would imply that A. They have money
B. They are generous with their money
How selfish can they get?
2007-08-16 09:38:58 · update #1
LOL. That's right, that would imply that
A. They have money
B. They are generous with their money
How selfish can they get?
2007-08-16 09:39:08 · update #2
beren: I'll tell you what, I will give my money directly to the Iraq war, and you don't have to, as long as you agree to not have your city protected from terrorism. We'll let your city be open for terrorists, since you don't support stopping them.
2007-08-16 09:44:10 · update #3
You don't understand. They want to take someone else's money to do this.
John Edwards volunteered to work in a soup kitchen for 2 days----so now he's an expert on poverty. Hillary spent a day working as a nurse's aide-----so now she know about healthcare for the poor. H*ll, they woulf have done more good writing a personal check to those organizations!
2007-08-16 09:36:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why don't Repubicans just go to Iraq and give the people of Iraq their money. Those of us who care more about Americans can keep our money while those that care more about Iraqi's can directly give their money to Iraqi people to pay for their health care, schools and infrastructure. And those who do will be able to cut out a middle man. Isn't the US about choice?
Edit: Haha, I support stopping terrorists. When did I ever say anything any different. BTW Al Queda is mostly in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not so much in Iraq although there are a few cells. They are mostly fighting insurgents in a civil war in Iraq. It is a shame that we are letting the Al Queda get stronger while we are concentrating on Iraq. But back to the original point. I said funding of healthcare, school, infrastructure, food ...etc for Iraqi's. Please try to keep up.
BTW how is the hunt for bin Laden going? Hint: he is not in Iraq!
2007-08-16 09:41:21 · answer #2 · answered by beren 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
1% of government funds go to welfare. 80% of welfare goes to poor children.
If your annual tax bill is $5000 then $50 (that's for the year) went to cover the cost of welfare. $40 of that went to children. (I'm taking a great leap here that you are unwilling to let American children starve in the streets).
That leaves $10/yr out of your pocket for the rest of welfare recipients, almost all of whom need it and only use it temporarily.
2007-08-16 09:59:22 · answer #3 · answered by jehen 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why don't we just take all the sick, elderly and poor children, put them in a ditch and bulldoze it in? You non caring jerk off. You going to be buried with your precious money up your tight @ss?
2007-08-16 09:56:40 · answer #4 · answered by grumpyoldman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Republicans are swift to speak about how they want 'their tax money spent, and on what!
But, DEMOCRATS PAY TAXES, TOO!
Wow, what a concept, that we want a say, on how that money is spent, as well!
2007-08-16 09:50:49 · answer #5 · answered by jaded 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Works for me, but you forget that they're dedicated to spending OUR money, not theirs.
2007-08-16 09:36:43 · answer #6 · answered by BDZot 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋