Saturday, April 18, 2009

What US government agency regulates banking IRA practices?

I would like to make a formal complaint about the handling of my IRA by a major US bank. The bank's improper practices are costing me a penalty. I need to know the government agency that I should get in touch with, and any website or phone number would be of great help. Thanks to all!


I would check with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation(FDIC .

www.fdic.gov

But first check with your State Comptroller and le their office know what is going on too.

Can you be a bit more specific on the "improper practices"?

Is the government abusing lack of education to break the Constitution?

Is the government using people's inability to understand basic instructions and their ever-decreasing reading level to break Constitutional law? Even for laws which could easily be made by amending the Constitution?


I've been complaining about the dumbing down of the school system for years because this country now has 3 generations of functional illiterates who can barely read, can NOT do simple math and think everything is funny because they have been raised on an endless series of mindless sitcome.

The main role of the school system is to make people feel good about being stupid rather than teaching them.

IT'S THE NEW WORLD ORDER... a world of "Haves and have nots" and in another generation or 2, America will be the biggest banana republic in the world.

yes. they diagnose a large percent of lower income children and/or children from single parents with ADD or ADHD and prescribe them methamphtimine. they say it helps? no one wants to make the time for these children. now that is child abuse and our government is abusing our children.put our children on drugs that they put most people in prison for. it is no difference whether made at a pharmaceutical company or a meth lab. it almost seems to me they are being set up to keep the prison system profitable. they are to busy teaching our children to tell on mom and dad. it's ashame what this country has done to the family structure. when i was growing up i feared my parents as far as if a teacher had to call my parents for doing something wrong there was a definite punishment. if police officers come to the school to talk to the kids it was about never talk to strangers and how we as kids can protect ourselves from bad people. otherwise we had to hit the books study and be involved in your community in a positive way. i never knew D is a passing grade. my parents told us a C was barely passing it was acceptable. a lie for my benefit. the best lie ever told to me.

Absolutely.

Thomas Jefferson once said "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

No.

yes.

What would be the benifits of humans living without government?

I have to write a dialogue between one person who says humans would be better of without government, while another person denies it.


absolute freedom and lots of money saved if you live long enough to enjoy it. no class distinction or moral judgement. sinning without prosecution.

It would be similar to a school without a system. Teachers and students would show up only when they wanted to, teachers might or might not get paid for their time, teachers might sleep with their students and get them pregnant without punishment, and students might never learn anything because of lack of discipline.

The only benefit of not having a government would be for criminals killing other criminals without ovrecrowding the prisons.

Umm.. I think if there was not any government that humans would eventually lead towards some form of social ordering. Naturally, some people are leaders and others are followers. Check out the book written by Thomas Hobbes called, Leviathan. It's a hard read, but a great book.

The pro government person says we need it. The anti government person says no. They fight. they both die. End of story.

Bored, angry people would find brief freeing pleasure in being unsupervised and in real danger.

Can't think of any other, really

no government = anarchy.

expand on that

NO POLITICIANS!

What would be the benifits of humans living without government?

I have to write a dialogue between one person who says humans would be better of without government, while another person denies it.


absolute freedom and lots of money saved if you live long enough to enjoy it. no class distinction or moral judgement. sinning without prosecution.

It would be similar to a school without a system. Teachers and students would show up only when they wanted to, teachers might or might not get paid for their time, teachers might sleep with their students and get them pregnant without punishment, and students might never learn anything because of lack of discipline.

The only benefit of not having a government would be for criminals killing other criminals without ovrecrowding the prisons.

Umm.. I think if there was not any government that humans would eventually lead towards some form of social ordering. Naturally, some people are leaders and others are followers. Check out the book written by Thomas Hobbes called, Leviathan. It's a hard read, but a great book.

The pro government person says we need it. The anti government person says no. They fight. they both die. End of story.

Bored, angry people would find brief freeing pleasure in being unsupervised and in real danger.

Can't think of any other, really

no government = anarchy.

expand on that

NO POLITICIANS!

What measures u think the government should take to minimise the growing crime rate?

Do u think it is the lean rules of most of the governments which is not stopping the criminals from their antisocial activities. Do u think the government should adopt Stringent punishments like the one followed in most of the Arab countres.


I think governments should lead by example.

Get rid of the current crime lord in the White House because his followers usually follow his lead. It's like you're a father in a house with young impressionable children and when you turn into a criminal then you can expect your children to follow suit. Also many companies can stop sending jobs out of the country so other criminals who may not have become that way except they are following the age old system of self preservation..

Law Enforcement is a growth industry. Let's suppose the crime statistics came out saying crime is up by 5%. So the government says "in order to eliminate crime we need more laws and enforcers". If you were a business which wanted to expand you would increase your product line and hire more salesmen.

Next year your statistics come out and you find sales are up by 5%.

So the government says "5% increase in crime so we need more laws and more enforcers". So they build more prisons, increase their product line of laws and hire more enforcers.

Next year "Sales are up by 5%, we need bigger prisons, more laws, more enforcers".

The jail business is just like the hospital or apartment business. If you want to make money you've got to keep the beds full.

So to answer your question: no.

Except for Federal crimes, dealing with criminal activity is the job of state and local governments and police. That's why some states carry the death penalty and some don't. Some have stricter laws and enforce them, some don't. Unfortunately, some judges are now rewriting laws to suit themselves instead of doing their jobs.

Personally, I think we need more people in charge of our penal institutions like Sherriff, Joe Arpaio, from Maricopa County, Arizona.

Joe has created the "tent city jail" I got this info off of the internet, but also read it in the newspaper some time back and have seen him talked about on tv.

"With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees) the associated Press reports:

About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent emcampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government issued pink boxer shorts.

On Wed. hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunks or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before.

Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks.

The tough-guy sherriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic. He said Wed. that he told all of the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your dam*ed mouths!"

jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them...

stopped smoking and *****magazines---took away their weights---cut off all but "G" movies.

Started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects, then started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't be sued for discrimination.

took away cable tv until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable tv for jails, so he hooked up the cable tv again allowing only the Disney channel and weather channel. (when asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.)

cut off coffee--zero nutritional value

When inmates complained--told them it wasn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back.

This is a good example of how a jail/prison should be run.

Way to go, Joe! You ROCK!!

As the previous post points out, your data findings are incorrect. Since 1993, Serious Violent Crime, Burglaries, and Firearm-related crimes have all continued their downward trend. However, there have been INCREASES...such as crime reporting rates and drug-related arrests. The origin of your question lies within a media that naturally focuses on bad news.

Fix the economy and the unemployment rate. More money = less desperation. It's too late now for us to start lopping off hands that steal bread. The people would never go for it. I agree with Jimi.

How about closing the wide open southern border for one- the font of virtually all of the gang and drug activity in the US today.

In the US of A, the most recent crime statistics released indicate a wholesale decrease in serious crime.

From where are you writing?

You are correct. The government should deal strictly with them. There the crime rate is less.

What measures u think the government should take to minimise the growing crime rate?

Do u think it is the lean rules of most of the governments which is not stopping the criminals from their antisocial activities. Do u think the government should adopt Stringent punishments like the one followed in most of the Arab countres.


I think governments should lead by example.

Get rid of the current crime lord in the White House because his followers usually follow his lead. It's like you're a father in a house with young impressionable children and when you turn into a criminal then you can expect your children to follow suit. Also many companies can stop sending jobs out of the country so other criminals who may not have become that way except they are following the age old system of self preservation..

Law Enforcement is a growth industry. Let's suppose the crime statistics came out saying crime is up by 5%. So the government says "in order to eliminate crime we need more laws and enforcers". If you were a business which wanted to expand you would increase your product line and hire more salesmen.

Next year your statistics come out and you find sales are up by 5%.

So the government says "5% increase in crime so we need more laws and more enforcers". So they build more prisons, increase their product line of laws and hire more enforcers.

Next year "Sales are up by 5%, we need bigger prisons, more laws, more enforcers".

The jail business is just like the hospital or apartment business. If you want to make money you've got to keep the beds full.

So to answer your question: no.

Except for Federal crimes, dealing with criminal activity is the job of state and local governments and police. That's why some states carry the death penalty and some don't. Some have stricter laws and enforce them, some don't. Unfortunately, some judges are now rewriting laws to suit themselves instead of doing their jobs.

Personally, I think we need more people in charge of our penal institutions like Sherriff, Joe Arpaio, from Maricopa County, Arizona.

Joe has created the "tent city jail" I got this info off of the internet, but also read it in the newspaper some time back and have seen him talked about on tv.

"With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees) the associated Press reports:

About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent emcampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government issued pink boxer shorts.

On Wed. hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunks or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before.

Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their pink socks.

The tough-guy sherriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic. He said Wed. that he told all of the inmates: "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your dam*ed mouths!"

jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them...

stopped smoking and *****magazines---took away their weights---cut off all but "G" movies.

Started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects, then started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't be sued for discrimination.

took away cable tv until he found out there was a federal court order that required cable tv for jails, so he hooked up the cable tv again allowing only the Disney channel and weather channel. (when asked why the weather channel he replied, so they will know how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs.)

cut off coffee--zero nutritional value

When inmates complained--told them it wasn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back.

This is a good example of how a jail/prison should be run.

Way to go, Joe! You ROCK!!

As the previous post points out, your data findings are incorrect. Since 1993, Serious Violent Crime, Burglaries, and Firearm-related crimes have all continued their downward trend. However, there have been INCREASES...such as crime reporting rates and drug-related arrests. The origin of your question lies within a media that naturally focuses on bad news.

Fix the economy and the unemployment rate. More money = less desperation. It's too late now for us to start lopping off hands that steal bread. The people would never go for it. I agree with Jimi.

How about closing the wide open southern border for one- the font of virtually all of the gang and drug activity in the US today.

In the US of A, the most recent crime statistics released indicate a wholesale decrease in serious crime.

From where are you writing?

You are correct. The government should deal strictly with them. There the crime rate is less.

The federal government is spending too much money to fight poverty?

My debate topic is the federal government is spending too much money to fight poverty but I am CON so i am debating against this. Anyone have any ideas on this topic?


Just look at how much money the US is spending on war while people don't have access to food, health care, education, etc.

Sure - check out the latest news article stating just how much of our tax money goes to frivioulous things like IPods and $13,000 dinners for government employees.

I would also research where the money goes - how much of it goes to schools (fights homeless in the future) and how much of it goes to war (creating homeless in other countries).

I would look into what he money is actually being spent on. for instance, if they put out a report and say the federal government spent 100 million to house the Katrina Victims, and when you look, you see that 50 Million was spent to pay the company that was processing the claim forms. little things like that that slip by most people (they actually only spent 50 million on the people)

Also consider the investment to turnaround ratio. government spends 4,000 on schooling for a poor family, they get a degree and good job, and end up paying 7,000 a year in taxes.

1. first contention, real dollars spent are not enough to fight the problem; evidenced by........

2. second contention, money spent on poverty has been effective

A. increase in tax revenue

Only about 2% of subsidies go to personal welfare.

Much greater amount goes to corporations - so called corporate welfare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_welfare

Base your argument around spending more money on fighting poverty in the United States. Focusing inward on our own homegrown problems, rather than worldwide poverty. There is not enough attention on this, so therefore theres not enough spending. IDK Just a thought.

Does the government have a plan to lend money for investment properties and if so how realistic is it?

Investment properties are getting harder to refinance after the properties have been fixed. Does the government understand that when they lower the interest rate the lenders make it harder for anyone to get loans and requiring higher credit scores, higher savings, and just higher requirements to even qualify for regular loans? Not to mention how much more ridicules requirements are for investors.


The government needs to STAY OUT of business as much as possible. Investing is a personal choice that not no one is forced to make. Everyone needs housing, so help should be available to supply it. But the tax payers should never have to bear the burden of supplying the private sector with profit. If you are an investor and not making a profit you are simply in the wrong field, you need to get out, not stick your hand out.

It's part of the cost of doing business, isn't it? I hope the government never gets in the business of flipping properties.

That is the cost of doing business, and if you aren't willing to do the work required to qualify for financing, you are in the wrong business. There is no government plan that I am aware of to help investors.

If you are thinking about getting a loan, then you should know about the basics before you get started. If you understand the basic dos and don’ts of loans, then you will be better equipped to find the best loan for your needs. Whatever type of loan you are applying for, you should follow these basic rules to help you find the best deal. When searching for a loan, it pays to do your research. Look for as many suitable lenders as you can, so that you can find the very best deal. There are many online pages thatyou can afford. Taking loans out over 10 years or more can be risky, and you cannot be sure what your financial situation will be at that time.

Why is Government injecting cash into the economy, when the cash is just going to get soaked up?

Right now, the economy is like a sponge, and the more that people squeeze it the more cash is going to fall out.

Putting more cash in will just give people more incentive to squeeze.

I'm talking about corporations applying for government bailouts, btw.


And we have a winner. More theft! Run the stocks up and bailout at the time when they hit their peak or close to it.

oh god.. we need more money.. as in more dollar bills... so many are poor and we right now have lesser job affiliations.

good i'm going to start squeezing the economy now, i'll hollar at u when i'm done!

i am poor.. am i meant to be and stay poor???

the economy is to be focused on the people who live in the society of America.

how are you talking about government bailouts with the above you stated?

What if government was the only employer or business? Do homeless people hire people?? ?

In the direct sense of the word not obscurely like yeah cause we need homeless shelters or social workers to help them out â€" I know I know scary I can think like that I know but really

Do homeless people hire people? And

What if government was the only employer or business?


If the government were the only employer, it would be obama's favorite dream. It's called communism.

What if the moon was made of cheese?

The federal government spends over two trillion dollars in a 13 trillion dollar economy. It is already a huge employer directly or indirectly.

That doesn't take into account local and state government.

No. If the government were the only employer, then the government would hire people.

If the government were the only employer, then you would have a communist state at worst or a welfare state at best!

yes

What forms do I use to get the gst rebate from the government?

I heard the canadian government offers tax incentives if you are 16 and up. I heard if you file your gst, you are eligible to get 100 dollars. I dont have a job, so i can just put 0 on all blanks. I was wondering, what exact forms do i need and what link online do i need? You cannot get the forms for the government yet until Febuary and I really want to get those forms in. Also, I heard you can get the forms online at the grc site, but there are so many. Please tell me all forms to fill out.

Thanks Sonny N.


The GST rebate comes automatically when you file your Federal Income Tax return and check the GST rebate box on page 1.

You can download the the tax return ( T1) form from the the following site .Make sure to select the form that corresponds to you province.

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/formspubs/t1general/menu-e.html

You're thinking of the GST Credit, which gets mailed out (or direct deposited) every 3 months (Jan, April, July, Oct). In order to apply for this credit, you must fill out a tax return - even if you didn't make anything. You also have to be 19 in order to receive the credit. You won't benefit from filling out a return this year since you are still a dependant and your parents claim the credits for you until you're 18. When you get your first job, you will get a T4 slip for your income the following February. THEN you will file your first return. So, quick summary, your first return will be filed for the year you start working or the year you turn 18 (so that you get the credit as soon as possible after you turn 19 - you just check "yes" on the return where it says "Are you applying for the GST credit"), whichever comes first.

Here's a link that will tell you a little more about it:

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/benefits/gsthst/faq_qualifying-e.html

I hope this helps. =)

P.S. Why did I get 2 thumbs down when I provided accurate info including a link that verifies it? Just curious. =(

Usually when your file your income tax report, there is a box at the top that asks you if you are applying for gst refund, you would simply put an X in that box, there is no form that I am aware of.

Is the new civilian Pakistani government setting itself up for disaster to prove a point?

I don't know, but it seems like, because of how the government is acting, and because of how open they are trying to be and how much danger that puts on the tribal assets and the assets in Kashmir, the new government is setting itself for disaster.

This will bring to light in a way, some of the secret activities by the ISI and Pakistan's military relating to the tribal groups, Afghanistan, and Kashmir.


keep dreaming! thanx to indian threats, pakistanis aRE united after a long time! thanx india and thanx to indian media-

pak government is working in a total sane and responsible way! unlike irresponsible indian attitude which could destroy whole south asia!

Not that they have much choice, they keep hiding things and people will start to be suspicious and will assume guilt by the fact that they're trying to hide information, which will be even worse as the number of pissed off countries in the Mumbai incident is fairly large, 10 countries, that's almost 5% of UN representation, and these countries have "friends" that can be influenced by their neighbour's badmouthing, so the "splash effect" can be quite drastic. If proven guilty, I suspect at minimum a trade embargo, which can be worrying for Pakistan as they can be hurt militarily by it as they buy weapons, up to an all out invasion by India and the US (not likely for the US, they're already in 2 wars, but they might provide support as well as a few more drone strikes into Pakistan).

But TBH I seriously doubt Pakistani official influence on this as they have too much to lose if caught, the US pressure on them to clean up or face US "preemptive action" attacks on suspected terrorist targets, especially along the Alfgan border is VERY high.

Do all government jobs require you to be bilingual and have a bachelor's degree?

Do all government jobs in the United States and Canada require you to be bilingual and hold a university degree?

Wouldn't a janitor working in a government agency be considered a government job too?

Please give me some examples of government jobs ranging from entry level or very low levels up to middle range. Thanks.


The government jobs below the minimum wage do not require a degree.

Not sure what agencies you are referring to. I see jobs with the IRS that post jobs for bi-lingual customer service reps and the government jobs in Puerto Rico look for bilingual employees. As far as having a degree, most entry level positions do not require education, normally GS-4 and below. It is possible for get a GS-5 to GS-7 job without a degree in some agencies.

Don' think so!

Federal government jobs in Canada may require you to be bilingual depending on the part of the country you are working in. Many jobs may require a university degree, but not all of them do.

Check the job listings for county, state, and federal openings. They usually give you a salary range and job requirements.

Government jobs requiring the least education and best paying are the elected positions (I think it shows).

Good Luck.

Do all government jobs require you to be bilingual and have a bachelor's degree?

Do all government jobs in the United States and Canada require you to be bilingual and hold a university degree?

Wouldn't a janitor working in a government agency be considered a government job too?

Please give me some examples of government jobs ranging from entry level or very low levels up to middle range. Thanks.


The government jobs below the minimum wage do not require a degree.

Not sure what agencies you are referring to. I see jobs with the IRS that post jobs for bi-lingual customer service reps and the government jobs in Puerto Rico look for bilingual employees. As far as having a degree, most entry level positions do not require education, normally GS-4 and below. It is possible for get a GS-5 to GS-7 job without a degree in some agencies.

Don' think so!

Federal government jobs in Canada may require you to be bilingual depending on the part of the country you are working in. Many jobs may require a university degree, but not all of them do.

Check the job listings for county, state, and federal openings. They usually give you a salary range and job requirements.

Government jobs requiring the least education and best paying are the elected positions (I think it shows).

Good Luck.

Why should government leave people to fend for themselves during times of crisis?

but they should be able to tell them what medical procedures they can or cannot have? Sounds like Republicans want government intervention when it meets their agenda, but not when it doesn't. I am pro-life, btw, just think the govt. has no right to tell people they cannot do something that is legal. people will have to answer to God some day. That is between God and them.


It isn't government's job to take care of us, or to tell us how to live. Government's only legitimate function is to protect our God-given rights. Any more than that, and government becomes destructive of freedom.

We as individuals, have an obligation to take care of those in need. Government only gets involved in this area when it can do so to gain power over us.

I guess killing someone in the electric chair is a "medical procedure" too.

What right do Libs have to deny that to a killer?

I agree with your views on the abortion stance. I am also pro-life, but I don't think the government has the right to tell people what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Haha I guess that actually makes me pro-choice for other people, but when it comes to myself and my own opinion, I think abortion is wrong. However, when it comes the republican view, or should I say neoconservative view, being pro-life is not about telling people what to do with their bodies, but about protecting the life of an innocent child. It's not about trying to control or take away the rights of anyone, but to protect an unborn child who can't fend or itself. Do you see the difference? I don't agree with it, but that is their view. I am against government intervention in all forms of healthcare, and that includes abortion.

I do not think govt should tell people what kind of medical procedures they can or can not have

I just do not think govt should be paying for anyones health care at all.

ANd besides natural disasters the govt should not offer any help to anyone.

If you are talking about abortion, if it affects no one but the one, that's one thing. But when it kills one so that one is not inconvenienced that is something different.

Do you not agree? At this point, the left now claims that a child is nothing but a parasite. That it can not live without the 'host' and if the 'host' does not want it then the host can get rid of it. Well I have a new flash, kids can not live without their parents until some of them are in their mid 20's. so how long before we decide that its ok to kill them at anytime until they can vote?

Come on... You let the government take over, they don't go away! You accept their control of your life in crisis, you then open the door for things like... well, take a look at New York and California? They have literally BANNED certain kinds of foods because of all of the people who receive public funding for health care. The argument is simple... if we pay for your care, WE WILL TELL YOU HOW TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF.

You can't take the money without the conditions...

I would prefer the federal government stay out of my life all together! The kind of programs being suggested by Obama are AT VERY BEST state issues (and I would argue a lot of those)... but mostly these are local (municipal) issues.

WE should be helping each other! But the government should not force us to do so!

If America is 'every man for himself', then how does that fit in with American ideals like equality, governemnt for of and by the people?

your right about one thing. God deals with each one as individuals. I wouldnt want a legal kill (abortion) on my record that day. Abortion is legal, the govt. makes it that way now, but that can change. I feel it is a health issue to be resolved by women.

Surely you must see that both the democrats and republicans are fooling you, keeping you party sheep stirred up and into the 2 party corruption.

I did notice a comment you made a few days ago with the statement you thought US Marines were pusies. I think you have shown great disrespect for those who have fought to keep your right to free speech and to post such crap. Somehow i feel you have never served your country, but would be one of the first to cry for our help when the fecal matter hit the fan.

First off you are not pro-life. Second an abortion is as much of a medical procedure as a beheading.

The below is the reason why rep. are on their side, and why libs. is the side their on:

Before R vs. W. the daughters of rich white men, and the girlfriends of rich boys could get safe abortions; but poor pregnant girls had to risk death and infertility, or give up college;

And if the father wanted to get married, and they refused, they could be forced to spend the rest of their life in an insane asylum.

Are you really "pro life"? Your question doesn't make sense. The government tells you not to kill people, right? Is that a medical procedure, too? Is it YOUR Constitutional right to do it anyway because your neighbor, whoever is an inconvenience to you because of the "right to privacy"? Get real.

The Republicans simply want to stand for the rights of the fetus being terminated because that child has no voice and no choice in the matter.

How to explain this to a liberal? It's like you don't want to repeal the 2nd Ammendment, just put a bunch of limits to a citizen's right to bear arms.

Oh dear God, please save us from fools like you.

You're user name suits you. Who said that we should leave people to fend for themselves? I haven't met anyone, Republican or otherwise, who don't think that people should get some help when they need it. Where do you think all the money came from for Katrina victims? We couldn't afford it, but I sent $50 because I believe that it isn't that huge a stretch for those people to be me.

What I DO have a problem with is when people live beyond their means, buying, for example, houses they can't afford and then actually have the nerve to say they were tricked or the government should pay off their mortgages. I'M struggling, but I'm paying my bills. The government isn't going to pay my mortgage and yet it now expects me to pay for those who should have known better. If you can't pay your mortgage, sell the house and rent an apartment. No one is ENTITLED to have a house any more than they are entitled to those shoes unless they can pay for it. Why should I have to pay for them, too?

And as for being "pro-life" but believing that those who choose abortion will just have to answer to God and deal with it someday.....That's like someone, MANY, MANY citizens of Germany or Nazi occupied territories who lived near the death camps and claimed they had no idea and that they had nothing to do with it. C'mon! Do you think God is going to just let them slide because they didn't drop the gas into the chamber or they didn't have their fingers on the trigger? Get real!

You certainly have a lot of growing up to do.

The answer of the person who said the daughters of the rich could always get proper medical care with their abortions is absolutely right! To me, Roe v Wade is not about abortion but more about good medical care if a woman chooses abortion. Abortion has ALWAYS existed and will continue to exist even if Roe v Wade is overturned. Therefore, the question is will women who chose to terminate have good medical care or will they have to go to the back alley and have a coat hanger or knife shoved up inside them? I am pro-choice but NOT pro-abortion. Sounds like you are, too.

"So long as men die, liberty will never perish" is what I have to say to that.

The blatant hypocrisy of the Republican party is astounding. Even more is that they don't realize it and will justify their beliefs with nonsense explanations.

Because everything they touch turns to manure not gold. Peace

Why should government leave people to fend for themselves during times of crisis?

but they should be able to tell them what medical procedures they can or cannot have? Sounds like Republicans want government intervention when it meets their agenda, but not when it doesn't. I am pro-life, btw, just think the govt. has no right to tell people they cannot do something that is legal. people will have to answer to God some day. That is between God and them.


It isn't government's job to take care of us, or to tell us how to live. Government's only legitimate function is to protect our God-given rights. Any more than that, and government becomes destructive of freedom.

We as individuals, have an obligation to take care of those in need. Government only gets involved in this area when it can do so to gain power over us.

If America is 'every man for himself', then how does that fit in with American ideals like equality, governemnt for of and by the people?

Come on... You let the government take over, they don't go away! You accept their control of your life in crisis, you then open the door for things like... well, take a look at New York and California? They have literally BANNED certain kinds of foods because of all of the people who receive public funding for health care. The argument is simple... if we pay for your care, WE WILL TELL YOU HOW TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF.

You can't take the money without the conditions...

I would prefer the federal government stay out of my life all together! The kind of programs being suggested by Obama are AT VERY BEST state issues (and I would argue a lot of those)... but mostly these are local (municipal) issues.

WE should be helping each other! But the government should not force us to do so!

I guess killing someone in the electric chair is a "medical procedure" too.

What right do Libs have to deny that to a killer?

"So long as men die, liberty will never perish" is what I have to say to that.

I do not think govt should tell people what kind of medical procedures they can or can not have

I just do not think govt should be paying for anyones health care at all.

ANd besides natural disasters the govt should not offer any help to anyone.

First off you are not pro-life. Second an abortion is as much of a medical procedure as a beheading.

I agree with your views on the abortion stance. I am also pro-life, but I don't think the government has the right to tell people what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Haha I guess that actually makes me pro-choice for other people, but when it comes to myself and my own opinion, I think abortion is wrong. However, when it comes the republican view, or should I say neoconservative view, being pro-life is not about telling people what to do with their bodies, but about protecting the life of an innocent child. It's not about trying to control or take away the rights of anyone, but to protect an unborn child who can't fend or itself. Do you see the difference? I don't agree with it, but that is their view. I am against government intervention in all forms of healthcare, and that includes abortion.

Are you really "pro life"? Your question doesn't make sense. The government tells you not to kill people, right? Is that a medical procedure, too? Is it YOUR Constitutional right to do it anyway because your neighbor, whoever is an inconvenience to you because of the "right to privacy"? Get real.

The Republicans simply want to stand for the rights of the fetus being terminated because that child has no voice and no choice in the matter.

How to explain this to a liberal? It's like you don't want to repeal the 2nd Ammendment, just put a bunch of limits to a citizen's right to bear arms.

You're user name suits you. Who said that we should leave people to fend for themselves? I haven't met anyone, Republican or otherwise, who don't think that people should get some help when they need it. Where do you think all the money came from for Katrina victims? We couldn't afford it, but I sent $50 because I believe that it isn't that huge a stretch for those people to be me.

What I DO have a problem with is when people live beyond their means, buying, for example, houses they can't afford and then actually have the nerve to say they were tricked or the government should pay off their mortgages. I'M struggling, but I'm paying my bills. The government isn't going to pay my mortgage and yet it now expects me to pay for those who should have known better. If you can't pay your mortgage, sell the house and rent an apartment. No one is ENTITLED to have a house any more than they are entitled to those shoes unless they can pay for it. Why should I have to pay for them, too?

And as for being "pro-life" but believing that those who choose abortion will just have to answer to God and deal with it someday.....That's like someone, MANY, MANY citizens of Germany or Nazi occupied territories who lived near the death camps and claimed they had no idea and that they had nothing to do with it. C'mon! Do you think God is going to just let them slide because they didn't drop the gas into the chamber or they didn't have their fingers on the trigger? Get real!

You certainly have a lot of growing up to do.

The answer of the person who said the daughters of the rich could always get proper medical care with their abortions is absolutely right! To me, Roe v Wade is not about abortion but more about good medical care if a woman chooses abortion. Abortion has ALWAYS existed and will continue to exist even if Roe v Wade is overturned. Therefore, the question is will women who chose to terminate have good medical care or will they have to go to the back alley and have a coat hanger or knife shoved up inside them? I am pro-choice but NOT pro-abortion. Sounds like you are, too.

If you are talking about abortion, if it affects no one but the one, that's one thing. But when it kills one so that one is not inconvenienced that is something different.

Do you not agree? At this point, the left now claims that a child is nothing but a parasite. That it can not live without the 'host' and if the 'host' does not want it then the host can get rid of it. Well I have a new flash, kids can not live without their parents until some of them are in their mid 20's. so how long before we decide that its ok to kill them at anytime until they can vote?

your right about one thing. God deals with each one as individuals. I wouldnt want a legal kill (abortion) on my record that day. Abortion is legal, the govt. makes it that way now, but that can change. I feel it is a health issue to be resolved by women.

Surely you must see that both the democrats and republicans are fooling you, keeping you party sheep stirred up and into the 2 party corruption.

I did notice a comment you made a few days ago with the statement you thought US Marines were pusies. I think you have shown great disrespect for those who have fought to keep your right to free speech and to post such crap. Somehow i feel you have never served your country, but would be one of the first to cry for our help when the fecal matter hit the fan.

The below is the reason why rep. are on their side, and why libs. is the side their on:

Before R vs. W. the daughters of rich white men, and the girlfriends of rich boys could get safe abortions; but poor pregnant girls had to risk death and infertility, or give up college;

And if the father wanted to get married, and they refused, they could be forced to spend the rest of their life in an insane asylum.

Oh dear God, please save us from fools like you.

The blatant hypocrisy of the Republican party is astounding. Even more is that they don't realize it and will justify their beliefs with nonsense explanations.

Because everything they touch turns to manure not gold. Peace

Should the government mandate alternative fuels and put a time limit on car companies?

What are some positive reasons that the government should get involved with this and put on a time limit?


no the government us. should not it did not mandate gas and diesel as the fuels so it should not mandate alternative ones. some alt fuel vehicles are available and those that want them need to search them out and buy them then go to local gas station and ask for the fuel they need as demand increases so will supply . if it is going to be let it be done because of consumer demand not because you forced it on other people by the govt.

note that the resolution only says cars sold in the U.S. Other countries would have to comply, and other countries have signed the kyoto protocol, so they most definitely would comply. This isn't communism, it's just changing what is sold in the united states. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/accuse_write?qid=20090109191904AA1Gda1&kid=ELpfHUf8OG_X8ZwOGrJm&s=comm&date=2009-01-16+09%3A25%3A28&.crumb=

If the government doesn't do it, it just won't happen because people don't like to change, and we'll be back in the same boat as last year, eventually. I have cars that run on natural gas (methane) and it has been very difficult to convince even friends and neighbors that these are a great way to break the oil habit. All summer long when people were paying over $4 a gallon for gas, I was driving around not using a single drop of the stuff and paying 80 cents a gallon for natural gas. It's also cleaner than gasoline and there is plenty of it in the USA and just off the west coast in the form of natural gas hydrates. I wish it would catch on, but I doubt it from what I've experienced, until the government gets involved. What's so sad is that the big 3 automakers already know how to make natural gas cars and have for years. All mine were made in the 1990's. It CAN be done.

No.

It's not the government's job in the first place. And, so far there is no alternative fuel that is head and shoulders above petroleum. CNG is the easiest, but has a finite limit of availability just like petroleum. Many of the bio-fuels have a larger energy input to manufacture than they they deliver to the engine. Besides, to you want to eat corn or drive on it. There is only so much of it able to be grown. None of this means to stop Alternative fuel research, but lets take a heads up approach. And tell me, just what enterprise does the government run at present that any one is satisfied with the job they are doing?

Absolutely. I have no doubt they will once the money in Oil dries up.

The governments of the world are all profiteering organisations. They are not about to cut themselves out of the revenue they earn from petrol.

If ever a responsible governing body decides to endorse renewable fuels like hydrogen or solar, further promoting the actual production of those fuels through renewable means, and put a mandate on manufacturers to build those types of vehicles, I would give my support.

At this stage, I feel that the manufacturers are sitting on their renewable technologies, probably as per government mandates.

Solar power has taken off in Europe, especially in Germany, but no-one can charge for solar power. I suspect that is why other Governments, the US and Australia for instance, resist renewable energy and go for more coal stations and Nuclear options. I wouldn't mind the Nuke option if it wasn't for the much ignored waste that no-one seems to be able to get rid of safely other than with a 'store and ignore' policy.

So... are you a PFD debator looking for an edge on this month's topic? of course the government should not mandate this because of the principle of free trade. The consumer should be looked upon to make the decision not the government.... as well as the fact that in the past governmetnal mandates have been huge failers- case in point sythafuels. The automotive industry also circuvents mandates as well.. if there is a way around it they will find it.

No, the government shouldn't mandate anything. They should quit subsidizing and supporting the many different commodities that are harming the general public and humanity at large. Without all the gvt. subsidies, gas would be around $15/gallon. Bet your **** car companies would begin to build better vehicles within a couple weeks or they would be gone for good.

Alternative fuels are not affordable enough to mass produce, simply.

Mechanics must be highly trained in electric/hybrid cars first.

Its a hell of a lot harder to switch fuels than people think.

Global warmning has been proven to be BS by many scientists, because after taking ice core samples in Antartica, they learned massive global temperature changes occur naturally.

Trust me, were not hurting the earth, the earth could wipe US out at any second.

The earth has survived dozens(that we know of) asteroid collisions which wiped out life and trees and everything.........so theres no way carbon raising the earths temperature or someone throwing a bottle in the ocean is gonna do JACK to the earths stability....

These stupid earth hugging hippies make me and others sick.

Mother earth ISNT sweet and ISNT nice and pretty, it could wipe us all out easily, and will eventually.

Obviously history proves this.

Oil dependence exposes the U.S. economy to the volatility of world oil markets. Price increases can occur suddenly and, because there are no widely available substitutes for oil, consumers and businesses may be unable to respond by changing consumption patterns. At the national level, the climb in oil prices during the past few years has imposed considerable costs. Between summer 2003 and summer 2006, world oil prices rose from roughly $25 per barrel to more than $78 per barrel. Each $10 increase requires roughly $50 billion of additional foreign payments (approximately 0.4 percent of GDP) per year. In 2006, U.S. foreign payments for oil were more than $250 billion. David L. Goldwyn the President of Goldwyn International Strategies describes in a letter written on oil dependence “Energy is a central challenge to U.S. foreign policy, not simply one of many challenges. Global dependence on oil is rapidly eroding U.S. power and influence because oil is a strategic commodity largely controlled by regressive governments and a cartel that raises prices and multiplies the rents that flow to oil producers. These rents have enriched and emboldened Iran, enabled President Vladamir Putin to undermine Russia’s democracy, entrenched regressive autocrats in Africa, forestalled action against genocide in Sudan, and facilitated Venezuela’s campaign against free trade in the Americas. Most gravely, oil consumers are in effect financing both sides of the war on terrorism.”

The real price of gasoline is what people actually pay for it, not just what they pay for it at the pump. Our dependency on oil from countries that are either politically unstable or at odds with the U.S. subjects the American economy to occasional supply disruptions, price hikes, and loss of wealth, which, according to a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy, have cost us more than $7 trillion present value dollars over the last 30 years. That is more than the cumulative cost of all of the wars fought by the U.S. since the Revolutionary War. The transfer of wealth to oil-producing countries - $1.16 trillion over the past thirty years - significantly increased our trade deficit. The Department of Energy estimates that each $1 billion of trade deficit costs America 27,000 jobs. Oil imports account for almost one-third of the total U.S. deficit and, hence, are a major contributor to unemployment. So the real cost of gas for someone living in the US is the pump price plus the taxes it pays that are used to subsidize the oil industry. Suddenly, oil is not as cheap, and just like with corn-ethanol, these taxpayers dollars are making fossil fuels artificially more competitive and keeping cleaner alternatives down.

The energy crisis is not going to solve itself without government intervention. In an interview with Charlie Rose, Thomas Friedman gives a good example of why the government needs to shape the free market to move to a cleaner future. He gives the example of someone inventing the first cell phone and putting it on the market. Consumers would be willing to pay 1000$ a piece and buy 10 pieces because it’s going to be enormously useful to them. But naturally as many people invest in this product the way the original consumer did, prices will go down and cell phones will become widespread and cheap. But why isn’t this a reality for alternative fuels? Simply because right now the majority of the people do not recognize a real need or advantage for alterative energy sources. They really do not care where they get their electricity from because it’s cheap. But the reason it’s cheap is because oil has been subsidized. Oil might be helping the United States on a short term notice economically wise but as we look at the long term status of the United States we see a disastrous economic and environmental road ahead for the future of the United States. The pro side of today’s debate is doing the inverse of that. We are laying the bricks of foundation of our future. The resolution is only the beginning to a prosperous future if action is taken place. Remember you cannot build a house unless you have a foundation to keep it stable. Once that foundation collapses so does everything that the foundation is supporting. This is what will happen to United States if we keep on leading ourselves down the same path we have been since the 1970’s. We will be allowing ourselves to fall into the depths of economic turmoil and environmental hardships if our present foundation is not fixed.

The government should do lots of things, but they dont, they are at the mercy of the corporations that fund their lifestyles.

Nope.

What is Rush's problem with the government telling companies who ACCEPTED money what to do?

He said on his show today that if government starts controlling companies small businesses are next.

I disagree. These companies are asking for money and accepting it from the government. What do they expect the government would do? BUT - the average small business owner isn't getting a handout from the government....therefore government won't be involved in their business.

If the companies don't want government involvement then they shouldn't go after government funds.


Actually, I think Rush doesn't support the government handouts of late.

I agree. Any corporation heading to the federal govt. hat in hand for a bailout should be subject to strict government controls, including but not limited to breaking up any company who complains or is otherwise deemed as "too big to fail".

The biggest mistake the govt. made so far was giving AIG $125 billion to get their books straight, but not breaking the corp. up into smaller entities.

If they don't like the govt. mandates, they can go back out to the private sector and look for a private investor to bail them out. And don't think for a second that a private investor wouldn't have rules and regulations that are similar to govt. demands.

The issue is what happens when the companies are back on their feet. Is the government freely going to give power back to the company, or will they conveniently pull the "but what if it happens again" card, scare the public and trick us into thinking it's a good idea to stick around?

The government basically bought stock in the companies. As a major stock holder, they have the right to say how the company is run.

If you don't like it, don't go to the government with your hand out.

Because the government should not be running businesses. Hell, they screwed up the economy! What makes you think they know how to run a business?

Limbaugh is on the dole, and has been for years. He also may be back on the oxycotin.

How do we receive the stimulus bonus from the government?

In news reports today, it is stated that the Rudd government will start paying them next month. How? Does the money go into your bank account?? How do they have my acc details?? Or do they send a chq?


If you filed a tax return you will get a check

I don't think we are getting a stimulus check. We are going to get a tax credit when you file taxes in 2009. I have not really been paying attention, the whole thing males me mad. Congress has not even read the bill of course who could it is over 1000 pages long and would take a few days to read.

First you have to sign the oath of allegiance, eternal fealty and commitment to religious obeisance to your new lord and savior, lord messiah Barack Hussein Obama.

Oh, yes, and you have to agree to be chipped in the right hand.

http://spicyinfo.8bit.at

A very informative website you can also get much information in website

You don't get a check or a deposit at all.. IF you have a job, you will have about 10 bucks less a week taken out in taxes.. that's it.. no more.. no checks...

What's better, big government employment, or smaller government?

Do you think it is better to have less government employment / departments (equating less government payroll), or bigger government that can employ more people to help offset higher unemployment?

What do you think of pork projects? Such as Rhode Island wanting millions for a Polar Bear exhibit. Will the expenses create real, long term jobs?

What about the pay raises for our government figures? Is it fair for them to give themselves a pay raise while they limit the pay of corporate figures?


SMALLER GOVERNMENT

the larger something is the larger its appetite

government needs to shrink on a global, federal, state and local scale

term limits for U.S. Sentaors, pay rates adjusted for congress and a payroll deduction for the cost of their healthcare

Smaller Government. If the government is bigger, we as taxpayers are footing the bill, and lets be honest, we as average citizens aren't going to get lofty government jobs anyway.

Pork projects are complete bull shizzle and are simply ways elected officials (congressmen and women) attempt to buy the votes of their constituants...."Look what I did for you....Now its time for you to do one little thing for me". Granted, there are some projects that are necessary, but a polar bear exhibit isnt one of them.

Regarding the pay raises, I think its completely hipocritical. We can make X amount but you cant...And honestly, I think the bankers and CEOs of some of these companies do MORE work in a day than most of the government figures will do in a week! Its not fair at all.

Small government.

The only things the government does well are the military and collecting taxes.

The government does very little else well. Have you ever seen federal housing? The places people lived in were/are so bad they needed to be torn down.

smaller government - more state government,less federal.More self-governing; being responsible for your own actions, tc.

What is the percentage of your paycheck that the government withholds foir taxes?

I am a high school student living in Montana who just got a job, and I was wondering what the government withholds, if there is a set amount.


As previous posters have stated, it depends on several factors, your total gross earnings (which is your hourly rate multiplied by the total hours worked in a week), whether you are paid weekly or biweekly, and your exemptions (most likely you are being claimed by your parents, so that will be 0 which unfortunately lets the government take as much as posisble). What you can do to find out exactly what you will be taxed is to look on the IRS website and download the Circular-E. It contains federal tax tables. Another thing to consider is state tax. I am not familiar with Montana's laws, but they may or may not also deduct state taxes from your check. The secretary of state for Montana should have that information readily available for you. Also, since you are just starting to work, some (not all) employers are not all complying with payroll laws. Familiarize yourself with the basics so that you know what you are entitled to. Go to the dol.gov website to see what the minimum wage requirements are for Montana as well as child labor laws, etc. etc. Welcome to the working world!

that would actually depend if your claming dependants and stuff, its usually something high like 19 percent but it might be about 10, 15 percent for you...

You would need to look at a W-4 worksheet. This article by Bankrate may help you....

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/Edit/basics/Introduction/basic_1a.asp

Considering you will probably not be earing too much (under $10k), you may only lose about 10-15% in taxes and another 6.2% with FICA.

that depends on your income, and what you file(married, single, head of household). Expect between 23-45%. The more you make the more they take....

What is the percentage of your paycheck that the government withholds foir taxes?

I am a high school student living in Montana who just got a job, and I was wondering what the government withholds, if there is a set amount.


As previous posters have stated, it depends on several factors, your total gross earnings (which is your hourly rate multiplied by the total hours worked in a week), whether you are paid weekly or biweekly, and your exemptions (most likely you are being claimed by your parents, so that will be 0 which unfortunately lets the government take as much as posisble). What you can do to find out exactly what you will be taxed is to look on the IRS website and download the Circular-E. It contains federal tax tables. Another thing to consider is state tax. I am not familiar with Montana's laws, but they may or may not also deduct state taxes from your check. The secretary of state for Montana should have that information readily available for you. Also, since you are just starting to work, some (not all) employers are not all complying with payroll laws. Familiarize yourself with the basics so that you know what you are entitled to. Go to the dol.gov website to see what the minimum wage requirements are for Montana as well as child labor laws, etc. etc. Welcome to the working world!

that would actually depend if your claming dependants and stuff, its usually something high like 19 percent but it might be about 10, 15 percent for you...

You would need to look at a W-4 worksheet. This article by Bankrate may help you....

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/Edit/basics/Introduction/basic_1a.asp

Considering you will probably not be earing too much (under $10k), you may only lose about 10-15% in taxes and another 6.2% with FICA.

that depends on your income, and what you file(married, single, head of household). Expect between 23-45%. The more you make the more they take....

What Happens to the American Economy When the Saudi Government is Toppled?

In the hypothetical scenario that the Saudi Arabian government is toppled in a coup, what kind of impact would this have on the United States economy and how could the U.S. make up for the loss in Petroleum imports?


first, US got oil reserves that will last 30-50 years. We do not use them b/c oil is high but not that high.

Second, if some wild group manages to remove Saud family from control of the country, there's a good chance that OPEC will collapse, increasing oil output and reducing price.

Finally, even if new regime manages to keep OPEC intact, they still need money, so they will be selling oil to somebody. So total oil output will not change much, and markets will adjust to redistribute supplies and everything will stay the same.

The reason the Saudis are our buddies is because they have agreed to price their oil in American dollars, as did most of the oil producing nations for many years.When this started the American dollar was backed by Gold.

The hidden reason the U.S. started a war in Iraq is because Saddam had started to accept Euros for oil instead of dollars.

Very slowly, so as not to cause a panic, other oil producing countries are cutting the use of dollars for oil......that is the cause....the affect we can see is at the U.S. gas pumps.....As the dollar loses value the price of gas goes up in dollars.......Which in turn is going to raise prices on every product that's dependent on dollars.

A solution that nobody is going to pay any attention to!

Congressman Ron Paul, a former member of the U.S. Gold commission, is running for President.

He is an expert on the economy and the use of Gold as money.

He's a long shot, but if by some miracle he gets elected,,,,if he doesn't get killed, his Constitutional policies could///would save the nation,,imho.

Check out:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RonPaul2008/

Thank You!

If it did not disrupt oil production, not that much would change, because we buy our oil in the world market. More likely that not political unrest in Saudi Arabia would effect production. There is no way to make up for the lost production because world oil production is near capacity now so prices would rise as the world bid for the remaining oil on the market. We have emergency reserves, but only enough for a few months. You have only to look back at the 70's to see the negative impact of oil shortages have on our economy.

What Happens to the American Economy When the Saudi Government is Toppled?

In the hypothetical scenario that the Saudi Arabian government is toppled in a coup, what kind of impact would this have on the United States economy and how could the U.S. make up for the loss in Petroleum imports?


first, US got oil reserves that will last 30-50 years. We do not use them b/c oil is high but not that high.

Second, if some wild group manages to remove Saud family from control of the country, there's a good chance that OPEC will collapse, increasing oil output and reducing price.

Finally, even if new regime manages to keep OPEC intact, they still need money, so they will be selling oil to somebody. So total oil output will not change much, and markets will adjust to redistribute supplies and everything will stay the same.

The reason the Saudis are our buddies is because they have agreed to price their oil in American dollars, as did most of the oil producing nations for many years.When this started the American dollar was backed by Gold.

The hidden reason the U.S. started a war in Iraq is because Saddam had started to accept Euros for oil instead of dollars.

Very slowly, so as not to cause a panic, other oil producing countries are cutting the use of dollars for oil......that is the cause....the affect we can see is at the U.S. gas pumps.....As the dollar loses value the price of gas goes up in dollars.......Which in turn is going to raise prices on every product that's dependent on dollars.

A solution that nobody is going to pay any attention to!

Congressman Ron Paul, a former member of the U.S. Gold commission, is running for President.

He is an expert on the economy and the use of Gold as money.

He's a long shot, but if by some miracle he gets elected,,,,if he doesn't get killed, his Constitutional policies could///would save the nation,,imho.

Check out:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RonPaul2008/

Thank You!

If it did not disrupt oil production, not that much would change, because we buy our oil in the world market. More likely that not political unrest in Saudi Arabia would effect production. There is no way to make up for the lost production because world oil production is near capacity now so prices would rise as the world bid for the remaining oil on the market. We have emergency reserves, but only enough for a few months. You have only to look back at the 70's to see the negative impact of oil shortages have on our economy.

What are some ways to obtain money from the government for your program?

I work for a psychosocial rehabilitation center that helps people with mental illness. There are a lot of things that members are requesting that we just don't have the money for. I have not been trained in writing grants, so I don't know another way to obtain money from the government for our program. Does anyone have any suggestions?


Start by typing "Grants" in the search area. This will, of course, pull up a bunch of stuff you can't use, but it will show you a lot of ways/sites to follow up for your grant request. Also, even if those you do contact can't help you, they can usually refer you to someone or a site than can. Check out the financial handlers in your own rehab center. Somebody has to be running the show and paying the overheads, so they might know more about where to get funds. Also, for this kind of work you have to have some sort of government agency licensing. Ask that agency where to go for grants. Failing all that, depending on what you need, check with various donation agencies (Salvation army, Goodwill, Churches in your community etc,) Many times they have thing you need and will give them to you. Happy hunting.

There are several ways to obtain government grants and other monies. All you have to do is to go on-line under Government agencies and then you'd probably would see a blog or something that will actually list everything that is available. You can do this at all levels of government(Federal, state and local). You can request the information to be sent to you either via e- or snail mail. The place that you work for should already have all of this information. All information is free and open to the public but sometimes it will take them a while to respond to your requests.

Beg, protest, yell and scream.

Apply to the state for grants. E-mail your state's web page. And tell them all about your program. Ask how to get your money.

Write a letter to Governament.

What do you think about government funded healthcare?

Im doing a report in school about government funded healthcare for debate club. Im on the negating side, but i cant think of anything negative. Does anyone have any ideas about bad things about government funded healthcare for the citizens of the United States?


Mike C got it right. An idea for a general theme for your side of the debate is that anything government can do, private industry can do better. Your opponents will probably talk about how wonderful socialized medicine is in places like Canada. Nonsense. Canadians wait inordinate amounts of time for healthcare, and those that can afford it sneak across the border to get better care in the States. Europeans have some of the same problems, and pay ridiculous tax rates for what they get.

It would be nice to have government funded healthcare, but it would cost a lot of money. Taxes would have to increase. Many Americans do not take care of themselves either. Why would you want to pay for someones healthcare because they chose to smoke or drink too much? Also a lot of people are overweight and that is also unhealthy. There would also be longer lines at clinics if everyone can see the doctor for free.

There are plenty of good reasons NOT to have gov't health care

1) Health care will cost too much of the Federal bodget, increasing deficeits and national debt

2) too many people will abuse the system tying up resources for other people who are truly sick (hypochondriacs!)

3) If price controls are forced on the medical proffessions, people will just leave the public sector, only the good doctors/nurses will be available to those with private insurnace or $$$

4) There will less incentive for the medical field to develop new technologies, there wil be less or none , payoff

5) there is already a shortage of medical proffisionals and facilties, gov't funded health care WILL NOT fill the shortatge, docotrs/nurses/phramacists don't want to be bossed around by the gov't

6) we already have gov't paid healthcare, its called MEDICARE/MEDICAID. people only quailify if there are US citizens and they have already spent all their own money

7) illegal citizens will load up the system, taking away roon from tax paying legal citizens

thre are more but that will get you started

1st- There are 40million + Americans with no health care whatsoever. Most civilized nations have it. As to cost, stop attacking soverign nations and cut back on some of your unnecessary space probes, granted knowing that Pluto has made a major impact on the lives of some poor Americans who can't afford to take their child to see a doctor. With all your middle income jobs being shipped of to China, there goes your major tax base.And a definate increase to your working poor.

Personnally I've never had to wait more than 1/2 hr. to 45 min. There were problems just after it started The new toy syndrome. people were flooding the system with every ache or pain. The neurotics had a ball. It didn't take long to change it to a triage system. If you were to emerency, twice that week, you may have to wait unless you were supposed to come back. I had an occasion to take a friend, who we thought was having a heart attack. We went to the desk, the nurse asked him what was wrong and when he told her, she told him not to move, called an orderly with a wheelchair and had him hooked up to an EKG before she even asked his name. Fortunately it was only an angina attack. There are waiting periods for things like hip replacements & some types of elective procedures. Because the med training in Canada is so well respected we loose a lot of doctors to the US. They must be the hacks buddy was talking about.

Friday, April 17, 2009

What are some changes to the traditional system of government during the Enlightenment?

I have to write an essay on the changes to the traditional system of government and need some help finding some of the changes.


There was a change from the feudal system, where life was centered around a king towards nationalism:

http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/cot/t2w26nationalism.htm

http://www3.northstar.k12.ak.us/schools/tan/lite/pol/pol.html

Here's some more information from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment

Hope this helps!

UPDATE:

http://aam.govst.edu/projects/pduignan/

What are the various positions or titles for student government?

The senior class president has already picked his cabinet members, but I am sure that there is a title that no one else has. I want to be a member of student government at my high school. I am a well-rounded student and I can complete nearly any task necessary. Can you please just list the various duties, titles, and responsiblities that can be fulfilled?


"student body organization"

pres

vpres

sec

treasurer

auditor

business mngr

peace officer

representatives from each yr level

There is Student Body President

Student Body Vice Pres

Class Pres

Class Vice Pres

Class(I think, may be Body) Treasurer

and Class Reps.

How would you develop a government if you were given the chance to create it from scratch?

I am writing a fictional book and would like to know what things would make up a good government. I am looking for some creative twists or ideas for a totally fictional made up government. Include any information that you feel would be useful. Time period, type of people, ect. is not that important at this point in time but you can add those things if you want to.


#1... out of the 10 commandments... 5 are essentilly the "basic tennants of civilization"

Don't lie

Don't steal

Don't sleep with someone else's mate

Don't kill (outside of the rules of law)

Don't covet your neighbor's stuff (actually... this refers back to "do not steal"... and don't sleep with the other guy's mate)

....

Just skip the ones related to worshipping God

Without AT LEAST those basic rules to stand on... there is no civilization.

#2) There is no sense in even trying to legislate morality. It doesn't work.

So... if you think some action causes social harm... tax the hell out of it, but don't prohibit it.

Abortion: Big tax. If women have abortions they aren't producing new taxpayers for the future. (the only view government has any business having about the issue)

Drugs: Big tax. (that includes alcohol.. tobacco, "pot"....)

Driving: Tax the heck out of TIRES and fuel. Tire wear is proportional to road wear caused by the vehicle. Fuel use is proportional to mileage driven... and thus the needed traffic monitoring by law enforcement.

Mandate public transport adequate to make it so the average person doesn't need a car. Bicycles, electric golf carts and public transport would be adequate for society to operate.

Require military service in order to EARN the right to vote.

Limit elected officials to ONE TERM of 4 years out of every 12 years. If someone is Governor... they serve 4 years... then have to wait 7 years before commencing a campaign for another office. Same for ANY AND ALL political offices.

Mandate profit sharing ratios. (If a business is losing money... CEO gets $1 a year MAX!) this would be the most complex law in my system....

No income tax. ONLY sales tax. And.. City sales tax = 1%, County = 1%, State = 1%, Federal = 1%

Ballanced budget law: The budget for the government can not exceed COLLECTED TAXES for the PREVIOUS year. NO NATIONAL DEBT ALLOWED. If the government doesn't ALREADY have the money.. they can't commit to pay for it.

******************

I could go on... and on... and on...

Every candidate gets a set amount of free time to speak on TV and radio plus a set number of column inches to write in the newspaper every day. Presidential candidates get 5 minutes, local city council gets 1 minute. There is no production value, just the candidate talking. The only graphic is a standard name and office (like an MTV graphic). That would get the money and 'slickness' out of the campaign.

Lobbying is allowed, but only to talk to the elected official in his office. No trips, meals, gifts, etc.

Any law passed applies to everyone, the legislature cannot exempt itself. You would not believe what our current governments get away with this way.

All budgets must be balanced except in time of disaster or war. See above to ensure all corporate accounting practices also apply to the government budget.

Presidential pardons must be reviewed by the court system. No more big contributors and buddies getting pardoned when they are guilty.

If I was to develop my own kind of government it would be based on the old community way of doing things. Each tribe or state or whatever would get a chance to lead. Let's say there are thirteen states, each year one state would take up leadership, so only the people in that state have to vote. In each state there would be different job groups and children at the age of twelve are measured for their abilities and begin to be directed in that direction. Only those who have proved themselves leaders by the time they are eighteen are allowed to try for power seats. To be in powere though you have to have participated in community based projects. Each leader must be at least tri-lingual and computer literate, undergine a course in diplomacy and have a second or third degree. There is also a retirement age not more than 50. After every five years, therefore the leader must be changed. Each year,the chosen leader is evaluated by a committee made up of specialists from each state for economic progress. Each ministry will be led by a Minister who has proved that he is the best in his field, for instance, the minister of defence would be the best Navy Seal in the country. The government would give a detailed report of it's expenditure each year, via the media.

Given the fact that 80% of people are whiners, 10% are extremists, 9% are morons, and 1% are decent intelligent citizens, I feel the only way to have a proper government run by humans is to have a communist gov't. Now don't get me wrong, the communist gov'ts from the past were no good I'll admit, but a communist gov't is designed to level the playing feild, and theoretically it promotes equality, given it's run and supported by honest kind people. That's where the fault with this type of gov't lies....there are no decent kind people running the governments today. Except "on paper".

Read The Prince by Machiavelli

Socrates too has some ideas about Philosopher Kings.

That is a great question. To use the words of Stephen King from On Writing, to be a great writer you must first be a great reader. Consider Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift. When he created the governments of Lulliput, etc, he based them on satirizing the government of England. That is one way to do it. Or consider the work of Anne Mc Caffrey in her Pern series. She created an entire societal structure for her planet. Just start brainstorming and deciding what things you don't like about our government and how you want yours to be. It will take a lot of research and time. Good luck. Pax - C

Following world war II there were ton's of misplaced jews around the world.

The decision was made to provide them with their own nation on the soil they still consider sacred Israel.

Albert Einstein was intimately involved with the creation of their country & the way it continues to opperate today.

Two things there that stick out to me are mandatory military service for every man at age 18 & every person is taught english begining in the first grade.

English was chosen for two reasons. First it is a global trade language, enabling the jews to become very invovled in global comerce & politics. Secondly the land that is currently Israel came from the British Mandrate of Palestine.

I Believe Israel has the most futuristic government today. Their country is in a really bad neighborhood yet it is fairly high functioning.

I do think the guy above me has the best answer, you really should read "The Prince" it is the definitive work on modern politics. You have to understand how something works before you can reinvent it.

How would you develop a government if you were given the chance to create it from scratch?

I am writing a fictional book and would like to know what things would make up a good government. I am looking for some creative twists or ideas for a totally fictional made up government. Include any information that you feel would be useful. Time period, type of people, ect. is not that important at this point in time but you can add those things if you want to.


#1... out of the 10 commandments... 5 are essentilly the "basic tennants of civilization"

Don't lie

Don't steal

Don't sleep with someone else's mate

Don't kill (outside of the rules of law)

Don't covet your neighbor's stuff (actually... this refers back to "do not steal"... and don't sleep with the other guy's mate)

....

Just skip the ones related to worshipping God

Without AT LEAST those basic rules to stand on... there is no civilization.

#2) There is no sense in even trying to legislate morality. It doesn't work.

So... if you think some action causes social harm... tax the hell out of it, but don't prohibit it.

Abortion: Big tax. If women have abortions they aren't producing new taxpayers for the future. (the only view government has any business having about the issue)

Drugs: Big tax. (that includes alcohol.. tobacco, "pot"....)

Driving: Tax the heck out of TIRES and fuel. Tire wear is proportional to road wear caused by the vehicle. Fuel use is proportional to mileage driven... and thus the needed traffic monitoring by law enforcement.

Mandate public transport adequate to make it so the average person doesn't need a car. Bicycles, electric golf carts and public transport would be adequate for society to operate.

Require military service in order to EARN the right to vote.

Limit elected officials to ONE TERM of 4 years out of every 12 years. If someone is Governor... they serve 4 years... then have to wait 7 years before commencing a campaign for another office. Same for ANY AND ALL political offices.

Mandate profit sharing ratios. (If a business is losing money... CEO gets $1 a year MAX!) this would be the most complex law in my system....

No income tax. ONLY sales tax. And.. City sales tax = 1%, County = 1%, State = 1%, Federal = 1%

Ballanced budget law: The budget for the government can not exceed COLLECTED TAXES for the PREVIOUS year. NO NATIONAL DEBT ALLOWED. If the government doesn't ALREADY have the money.. they can't commit to pay for it.

******************

I could go on... and on... and on...

Every candidate gets a set amount of free time to speak on TV and radio plus a set number of column inches to write in the newspaper every day. Presidential candidates get 5 minutes, local city council gets 1 minute. There is no production value, just the candidate talking. The only graphic is a standard name and office (like an MTV graphic). That would get the money and 'slickness' out of the campaign.

Lobbying is allowed, but only to talk to the elected official in his office. No trips, meals, gifts, etc.

Any law passed applies to everyone, the legislature cannot exempt itself. You would not believe what our current governments get away with this way.

All budgets must be balanced except in time of disaster or war. See above to ensure all corporate accounting practices also apply to the government budget.

Presidential pardons must be reviewed by the court system. No more big contributors and buddies getting pardoned when they are guilty.

If I was to develop my own kind of government it would be based on the old community way of doing things. Each tribe or state or whatever would get a chance to lead. Let's say there are thirteen states, each year one state would take up leadership, so only the people in that state have to vote. In each state there would be different job groups and children at the age of twelve are measured for their abilities and begin to be directed in that direction. Only those who have proved themselves leaders by the time they are eighteen are allowed to try for power seats. To be in powere though you have to have participated in community based projects. Each leader must be at least tri-lingual and computer literate, undergine a course in diplomacy and have a second or third degree. There is also a retirement age not more than 50. After every five years, therefore the leader must be changed. Each year,the chosen leader is evaluated by a committee made up of specialists from each state for economic progress. Each ministry will be led by a Minister who has proved that he is the best in his field, for instance, the minister of defence would be the best Navy Seal in the country. The government would give a detailed report of it's expenditure each year, via the media.

Given the fact that 80% of people are whiners, 10% are extremists, 9% are morons, and 1% are decent intelligent citizens, I feel the only way to have a proper government run by humans is to have a communist gov't. Now don't get me wrong, the communist gov'ts from the past were no good I'll admit, but a communist gov't is designed to level the playing feild, and theoretically it promotes equality, given it's run and supported by honest kind people. That's where the fault with this type of gov't lies....there are no decent kind people running the governments today. Except "on paper".

Read The Prince by Machiavelli

Socrates too has some ideas about Philosopher Kings.

That is a great question. To use the words of Stephen King from On Writing, to be a great writer you must first be a great reader. Consider Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift. When he created the governments of Lulliput, etc, he based them on satirizing the government of England. That is one way to do it. Or consider the work of Anne Mc Caffrey in her Pern series. She created an entire societal structure for her planet. Just start brainstorming and deciding what things you don't like about our government and how you want yours to be. It will take a lot of research and time. Good luck. Pax - C

Following world war II there were ton's of misplaced jews around the world.

The decision was made to provide them with their own nation on the soil they still consider sacred Israel.

Albert Einstein was intimately involved with the creation of their country & the way it continues to opperate today.

Two things there that stick out to me are mandatory military service for every man at age 18 & every person is taught english begining in the first grade.

English was chosen for two reasons. First it is a global trade language, enabling the jews to become very invovled in global comerce & politics. Secondly the land that is currently Israel came from the British Mandrate of Palestine.

I Believe Israel has the most futuristic government today. Their country is in a really bad neighborhood yet it is fairly high functioning.

I do think the guy above me has the best answer, you really should read "The Prince" it is the definitive work on modern politics. You have to understand how something works before you can reinvent it.

What are the advantages of working with the state government?

I just got a job with the state government. We're responsible for assessing properties such as houses, farms, condos, and duplexes, and determining the property tax based on the assessed value.

Are there any perks, outside of the job, that comes with working with the government?

What about hot women? I would like them as one of the perks. ;) I'm 23, a college student. This job will definitely benefit me.


No hot women..but I hear the retirement plan is great. haha

Well, I went on disability from the state and now I"m going on retirement from them. In the last 4 years due to me having to raise 4 grandchildren and have gotten in really bad debt on loans and credit cards and have collection agencies after me. But because disability pay and state retirment is exempt from garnishment and judgements they can't get anything. You retirement benefits are also exempt from bankruptcy. You may not think this is important now but it will be in the years to come. At least stay with them for 10 years to get vested in retirement. Aso, you can transfer to other jobs within the state employment without a big hassle and they are more apt to hire you

You don't have to be polite to the public. Your job is fireproof unless you contradict the boss, kill somebody, or work drunk or stoned.

You do accumulate a lot of vacation and sick time, in Louisiana anyway (my mom worked for the state). Also job security.

How many individual freedoms ought our government, reasonably take away in the interest of national security?

Which parts of the government should make those decisions, the elected officials or the career bureaucrats? Are there any freedoms that ought never be taken away, no matter what is happening? Should freedoms taken away be eventually restored? If so, how might those making that decision know when it is safe enough to justify returning them? If not, how might those making the decision justify the permanent arrest of certain freedoms?


NONE

None, because they don't have the right to legally take them away. They can appear to be taken away, but you must understand the supremacy clause of the Constitution to truly understand that they cannot really be taken away.

None. It is a false argument to equate security and freedom as a zero sum game. The more rights we have the more secure we are. Bush showed the fallacy of this argument. There are many including the Canadian Bar association who are calling for Bush to be charged for war crimes and crimes against humanity for his illegal actions post 9/11.

Those who would sacrifice their very real rights for the illusion of security deserve neither.-- Benjamin Franklin.

All the freedoms in the Constitution should be preserved, no matter the situation. If not, the state will chip away at them at every turn. It's not surprising that while most of us saw 9/11 as a tragedy, certain government officials saw it as an opportunity.

NONE.

What would be a good image to represent the concept of local government in a civics textbook?

The well's running dry... I'm revising a book, and I already have a city hall in another setting, and the current version has only a city skyline, which doesn't do it for me.

This image would begin a chapter on how local government works, so it should actually illustrate local government.

I've been struggling to find an image of a city council meeting I could buy or use for free.


Ancient as Rome an equally applicable to Earth circa 2007 and a bit of a history lesson for you - - - -

You have seen a Horseshoe - - - a U, e well that in itself is an ancient symbol for Government - - - - when discussing issues members of local councils by habit, this actually goes back to aborignies squatting in the dust, people tend to sit in a U with the top space open for the speaker and/or leader... How does this translate into image? U shaped table, do not need faces just suggestion of people sitting staring at speaker standing in the open space of the U ......

There are a few historical precedents for this image my favorite though is to float the U with right lower and left a bit higher with speaker standing to viewers' right, this allows a profile of several sitting at table, the number of which depends on what you wish to fo; anicent number combos of sitters to speaker are 4 plus 1, 6 plus 1, etc but anything beyond 8 plus 1 tends to get crowded....

Peace...............

PS I swear I did not look at other answers before answering but yes the picture sited is evidence that this encient practice is still practiced....

One from Norse mythology shows the warriors kneeling on their shields before their leader.....

Are you looking for something like this?

http://www.ci.farmington-hills.mi.us/images/Pic-Government-MeetingInAction.jpg

I am not sure about the usage of it though.

How about a picture of a zoning hearing but instead of the room being empty except for the developer, have some people act as if they're voicing their opinion.

What would be a good image to represent the concept of local government in a civics textbook?

The well's running dry... I'm revising a book, and I already have a city hall in another setting, and the current version has only a city skyline, which doesn't do it for me.

This image would begin a chapter on how local government works, so it should actually illustrate local government.

I've been struggling to find an image of a city council meeting I could buy or use for free.


Ancient as Rome an equally applicable to Earth circa 2007 and a bit of a history lesson for you - - - -

You have seen a Horseshoe - - - a U, e well that in itself is an ancient symbol for Government - - - - when discussing issues members of local councils by habit, this actually goes back to aborignies squatting in the dust, people tend to sit in a U with the top space open for the speaker and/or leader... How does this translate into image? U shaped table, do not need faces just suggestion of people sitting staring at speaker standing in the open space of the U ......

There are a few historical precedents for this image my favorite though is to float the U with right lower and left a bit higher with speaker standing to viewers' right, this allows a profile of several sitting at table, the number of which depends on what you wish to fo; anicent number combos of sitters to speaker are 4 plus 1, 6 plus 1, etc but anything beyond 8 plus 1 tends to get crowded....

Peace...............

PS I swear I did not look at other answers before answering but yes the picture sited is evidence that this encient practice is still practiced....

One from Norse mythology shows the warriors kneeling on their shields before their leader.....

Are you looking for something like this?

http://www.ci.farmington-hills.mi.us/images/Pic-Government-MeetingInAction.jpg

I am not sure about the usage of it though.

How about a picture of a zoning hearing but instead of the room being empty except for the developer, have some people act as if they're voicing their opinion.

Does the government have alternate sources of energy that they are not disclosing?

The world’s economy is based on petroleum products. Every known alternate or hybrid source of energy is only a stop-gap for oil, not a replacement. Everything we know only prolongs the supply, or shifts it from the current means. If the government can still make money on oil, are they hiding the solution until we run dry?


Yes and No.

There will always be oil, petrol for the Elite.

While they ruin the planet with lear jets and motor yachts, we will be using electric technology that was used in the first part of the 20th century.

One of the first working automobiles was an electric car.

One of the first Internal Combustion autos, Henry Fords Model T , got 24 MPG, that is better than any hummer.

That was 100 years ago.

Mr Stanleys Steamer used coal, or whatever would burn, horse droppings, cattle pooh, dead limbs of trees to generate Steam Compression. It worked then, it works now.

The current gov makes a TON of revenues from Petrol products. They levy taxes on the purchase of the vehicle, they levy taxes on the use of the vehicle, they levy taxes on the fuel it uses to operate, then they levy taxes on the destruction of the vehicle. It is a win/win for them.

Solar Power, developed by NASA with Tax $, is now a private industry. It is a known fact that if 1/16 of Nevada was used as a solar collection area, it could generate enough electricity to power 1/2 of the nation, 24/7.

Add wind and Tidal collections you would have the country covered in renewable, safe, clean energy.

Look at an interstate highway, if one could have a train transport there personal vehicle, and take buses , 80 people not driving 80 vehicles could travel across the country in three days and there cars would be waiting after they arrived.

The interstate highways and other infrastructure is collapsing around us while we rebuild some other country that we were responsible for partially destroying.

If more cities and towns used buses that ran on hybrid or bio diesel, that would save a mass of oil and environment.

I ride a bike, I take the buses, or I sail.

I choose to.

There are a whole lot of technologies that are not being implemented. But it isn't the government doing the hiding. The oil companies bought up most of those patents and shelved them.

Doubt me? Look up ocean thermal conversion pebble bed reactors, bobbing ducks tidal power. There are plenty of solutions, but they do not put the energy production in the hands of the few, and that means they will continue to be squashed.

Would they keep a secret? Yes. Can they keep a secret? No. Remember certain sexual practicies in the Oval Office?

The replacement for oil, though, is methane. We release it every day in every way without burning. It is 20 times more potent as a greenhouse gas as the carbon dioxide it would become. There is a 20,000 year supply of methane ice below the 1600 foot level off California alone.

Definitely. The government is always hiding things from the people. I bet that the gas company is bribing the government to keep the other sources of energy a secret.

Would our government keep secrets from us??? That's simply preposterous!