Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

$1.5 billion in tax money

Comments

14 comments

  • spanielsells
    Why are Katrina "victims" still living in government-provided housing?
    0
  • KSUmarksman
    AFAIK it was the government that decided that all signal will be digital after a certain point in time,
    so they are fixing a problem that they are creating [xx(][:(!]
    0
  • jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    0
  • spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    Can you explain a time when it doesn't?
    0
  • KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    Can you explain a time when it doesn't?


    when it created the interstate system?
    0
  • spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    Can you explain a time when it doesn't?


    when it created the interstate system?
    Why? Federal highway funds is a huge scam in an upon itself, and is used for nothing more than placing undue pressure on states to do what the federal government wants it to do.
    0
  • KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    Can you explain a time when it doesn't?


    when it created the interstate system?
    Why? Federal highway funds is a huge scam in an upon itself, and is used for nothing more than placing undue pressure on states to do what the federal government wants it to do.


    I can't imagine today's on-demand economy running smoothly using cruddy 2-lane state roads and the railroad system. Sure there are a few good stretches of privately operated highways but they are few and far between.
    0
  • ljwrench
    Let me see if I've got this right. So our all-knowing-all/caring government decided that we need a better picture quality on our T.V.'s so they mandated that all t.v. reception will be digital. Then they hand out 1.5B of our money so we can better afford to be amazed at our better picture quality. This is B.S.!!!! What's next. Make us all go out and buy an I-pod? What I want to know is who got paid off in congress to pass this crap? H.D.T.V. manufacturers?[:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!]
    0
  • spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    sometime the government just SUCKS
    Can you explain a time when it doesn't?


    when it created the interstate system?
    Why? Federal highway funds is a huge scam in an upon itself, and is used for nothing more than placing undue pressure on states to do what the federal government wants it to do.


    I can't imagine today's on-demand economy running smoothly using cruddy 2-lane state roads and the railroad system. Sure there are a few good stretches of privately operated highways but they are few and far between.
    It might have been a good idea if it would have been used to simply build highways and end it at that. But, highway funds are used to twist arms in state legislatures to have states comply with what DC liberals want them to do.

    You want federal highway funds? Pass a seatbelt law.
    You want federal highway funds? Pass a helmet law.
    You want federal highway funds? Raise the drinking age from 18 to 21.
    You want federal highway funds? Lower the BAC limit on a DUI.

    Despite the fact that states pour millions and billions of dollars into the federal coffers, and the feds are supposed to redistribute the wealth to poorer states, that isn't even done. It is merely a shell game, nothing more.
    0
  • Don McManus
    Is this retro-active? Do I get reimbursed for the digital box that I've been paying for these past few years?
    0
  • spanielsells
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Is this retro-active? Do I get reimbursed for the digital box that I've been paying for these past few years?

    I think you have to be a Democrat or at least an illiterate disinterested voter to qualify. Then again, that's rather redundant.
    0
  • AHansen
    Sen. Cantwell that is quoted in the article is a good dem. she will make sure every poor, unemployed, welfare recipant here in Washington state will not only have a converter but a new HGTV to watch while they collect unemplyment checks. Not only will she encourage the use of federal funds but i'm sure she will figure out another way to increase our state taxes.
    0
  • JackBwr
    I wish they'd switch to HDTV and if you don't buy one, you're SOL. I bought one years ago and have to pay extra for HD packages. It's BS. It's to the point now where everybody should be able to upgrade. Instead of wasting the money on converter boxes, why not spend the money on tax breaks to update tvs?? Then it's their choice if they want tv or not and it's at least getting people into the 21st century.

    Tired of people crying about wanting to keep their 30 year old tv. Most people don't keep a car longer than 3 years.

    In all honesty though, it is a bad idea for government to have to subidize the poor for ANYTHING tv related.
    0
  • AHansen
    Tax breaks are not sanctioned by the Democrates. Therefore wouldn't work.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity