| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#13
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:56:30 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 9/22/15 3:52 PM, wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. Perhaps the Libertarian candidate of your choice will have the answers to the pressing issues you raise. Oh, wait. I am not sure there is a libertarian candidate yet but they would definitely be better on the money issues. The foreign policy is more likely to be better. I am not sure there is an answer to the water problem but a free market solution is likely to be better than regulation. If the water is too expensive to sprinkle on the lawn, people will stop watering their lawns. The real problem is going to be agriculture and those "blooming deserts:" in California are likely to go away. It is not quite as bad in the mid west but they are still depleting the Ogallala aquifer and that is fossil water, just like the deep water in California that they have pretty much used up. We are not getting that water back. One statement in last month's Scientific American is definitely true. "Water flows toward money". When Jerry Brown implored his rich democrats in Southern California to conserve water, the actual usage WENT UP. The answer is to make them pay through the nose for it. Water rates should go up exponentially as usage goes up. Basic drinking and bathing water should be fairly cheap but when you start getting over a couple thousand gallons a month, the rate should start going nuts. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Ahh, 'Merica... | General | |||
| The dumbing down of 'Merica... | General | |||
| Ahhh, 'Merica... | General | |||
| Merica | General | |||
Threaded Mode
