thompsonx
Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
What the fuck do you mean it "isn't good starting off with a mountain of debt"??? How do you explain college grads starting off with hundreds of thousands of student loan deabt What college charges hundreds of thousands of dollars for a four year degree? Gee, Imp, isn't that bad for them too? I guess in your world they should have free tuition cuz...well...gee....cuz...it would be bad...ya know??? Right. I did not have to pay mine back I am for public education and I am also for compulsory military service. Why are you for compulsory military service? Both, if properly done, educates and fosters nationalism and esprit des corps. Perhaps you could tell us just where compulsory u.s. military service has been effective? Remind us again about the advantages of nationalism. Should a countries' population be at least minimally educated? Yes and that is what our school system does and parents are free to spend more to get their kids a better education. Is it a confiscation of people's earnings? Yes and so is medicare and I support that also. But only minimally. How minimal? See imp, you are a concrete thinker. You think that because a person is opposed to something that they have to be opposed to all like things. Or at least opposed to all things funded in a like manner. Perhaps it has to do with logic and consistancy of thought? It makes you tiresome. As I have told you, Imp, there is no such thing as equality except under the law. So you are not a christian I take it? People aren't born with the same intellect, ambition, imagination or talent. You do seem to have a pretty firm grasp of the obvious I do not want to support losers who refuse to participate in the system by getting work and competing. So you are against the leaches like bill gates who have their nose in the public trough? Got it? I have said thousands of times With only 1400 posts you could not have said it thousads of times ...at least not here. and I know I have said it to you directly. You and I argue for different things. I argue for self sufficiency and a requirement that people work for what they take because nothing is free. So this would mean that you would be against children inheriting from their parents. You would also logically be aganst gambling, because those who inherit and those who win at gambling have not worked for it? In the alternative, they have to pay back what they took because.................................wait for it...................... nothing is free. Air is free,love is free,beauty is free,truth is free etc. You argue for people not working and getting tax payer money. Why is that?ization of I would have to check with her but I do not believe that that is a fair characterization of her position. You also argue for people getting tax payer money but not having to pay it back so the next person in need can utilize the funds....why is that? That is not my arguement at all...I ask you how you would structure it. You know what you argue for, Imp? It is really quite simple. You argue for free money. You argue for the fruits of other people's labor. It seems to work pretty well for the rich how about the not rich...wouldn't that be logical? That's all. No great mystery.
< Message edited by thompsonx -- 8/3/2011 1:39:25 AM >
|