richardhutnik said:
wfz said:
osamanobama said:
but for subsidies, thats different. thats the government taking your money and giving it to someone else. meaning chosing winners and losers. thats not captalism. for things like alternative energy, im all for it. but right now most of it isnt viable alternative. if it was, the market would take care of it, and government wouldnt have to throw billions of dollars at it. the market chooses whats right for consumers, goverment doesnt. government creates artificial prices, and takes away jobs from other sources, that are proven. the day that solar, wind or whatever energy becomes an ecinomical alternative, trust me there will be thousands of people wanting to get a slice of the pie. the market determines when that comes. and ironically enough its also goverment that keeps us from being energy independent, and keeps us from using alternative energy. we cant drill our own oil, we cant make solar fields in the middle of the dessert, we cant make wind farms, miles of our coasts, and we cant make nuclear plants, all because of politicians. when government interfers with the free market they stop advancement in everything, including energy
|
Just wondering: how do you feel about the government giving money to poor families/individuals who can't sustain themselves (and perhaps their needed medications) due to mental illnesses, etc?
|
Hey, wouldn't the answer be that doing this prevents the market from picking the winners and losers in life? Isn't having people die of starvation or lack of shelter or health care a simple way to thin the herd?
|
That's why I originally asked him - I wanted to see the response he'd give. Unfortunately, he looked right over my reply.
