KO Indians "Upset" Over Pro-2A Billboard

[Heffay]

Thanks, Reagan! Look at what you did! Just another RINO interested in big government...

[FJ540]

There's no such thing as a program which gives to one which doesn't take from another.

[minnhawk]

Way to miss the argument "in toto"
That "swooshing sound" was the point of the post going over your head.

[Dante]

In the 31 / 2 years after false rumors started that the Obama administration was giving free cellphones to poor people

[Squib Joe]

The cell phone providers themselves ( such as FreeGovernmentCellPhones.net ) call them Obama Phones. This isn't a term made up by the Republicans.

And while Obama didn't start the program, the deregulation and bloating of the program DID happen under his watch. The cost has gone from 143 million a couple of years ago to over 2.2 billion. We have people getting dozens of phones and selling them to drug dealers for extra cash. Added fees on your phone bill pays for all of this.

[minnhawk]

wrong-o. Swing and a miss, strike two.

[Heffay]

And while Obama didn't start the program, the deregulation and bloating of the program DID happen under his watch. The cost has gone from 143 million a couple of years ago to over 2.2 billion. We have people getting dozens of phones and selling them to drug dealers for extra cash. Added fees on your phone bill pays for all of this.

Yes, because the phone companies didn't want the program to expand....

Deregulation is good! This is exactly what we wanted to have happen!

[FJ540]

Deregulate tax burdens and private industry = good. Deregulate government spending = very bad!

[Heffay]

Deregulate tax burdens and private industry = good.

So, we should be more like China, where private businesses are free from government regulation?

[NMRMN]

Deregulate tax burdens and private industry = good.

So, we should be more like China, where private businesses are free from government regulation?

The chinese government knows darn well they are letting companies pollute in order to achieve economic superiority. There is a difference between regulation and onerous regulation.

[Heffay]

The chinese government knows darn well they are letting companies pollute in order to achieve economic superiority. There is a difference between regulation and onerous regulation.

Oh... of COURSE there is. I wonder who should be allowed to determine what the difference is?

[FJ540]

Someone might think you use too many electrons and then what would you do el Heffay?

[Heffay]

Someone might think you use too many electrons and then what would you do el Heffay?

Make my own? Hook up a generator to the bike trainer and away I go!

But that pic is a good reminder why whenever someone says the EPA should be shut down that they are wrong. The invisible hand is hard at work in China!

[NMRMN]

[Oh... of COURSE there is. I wonder who should be allowed to determine what the difference is?

The Sierra Club, obviously!

[FJ540]

Someone might think you use too many electrons and then what would you do el Heffay?

Make my own? Hook up a generator to the bike trainer and away I go!

But that pic is a good reminder why whenever someone says the EPA should be shut down that they are wrong. The invisible hand is hard at work in China!

You'll be taxed on your energy production. That's big revenue for the govt.

They think they're entitled to the other products of your labor - it won't be long before they try taking money from those who aren't using enough services too.

Perfect example (although privatized single provider industry): Xcel converts their NE Mpls River Road coal plant to NG and saves Millions in operating costs, gets the govt to allow them to raise rates because NG is more expensive to purchase than coal. Then after YEARS of begging people to be more energy efficient - asks to raise rates because people aren't BUYING enough! Gets turned down, so they hike their fuel surcharge...