Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal Cat
Yeah, the Bush tax cuts of 2003 didn't work, as evidenced by the horrible economy of 2003-2006, right? (that's called sarcasm). Dividend cuts were part of an overall tax cut strategy. I don't know what you consider "rich," but there are millions of people that get dividend payments every year. I do, and I ain't rich.
My comment about providing everyone a free laptop was SOMEWHAT TIC, but I guarantee you that's what people will be calling for next.
I didn't say anything is wrong with free wi-fi in populated areas! We already have it here. It's already happening, being driven by local governments in conjunction with private enterprise. My point is the government should NOT be providing and/or paying for everyone's internet access!
|
Clasic. Your post was SOMEWHAT TIC (thanks for the caps on that one), followed by your "guarantee" that it will happen. I think you may need to brush up on the TIC meaning.
Obama didn't say the government was going to pay for it. He said he would ensure it was available to everyone. Private enterprise is making this a reality in many cities already (ala San Francisco). Corporations have proven that they are far more than willing to foot the bill to put in wifi in many cities where they have received cooperation from local governments. He is simply promising the support of the federal government.
The US IS behind in wifi technology. Far behind. You can whine and say "yeah, but they are socialist!" But it doesn't change the fact that they are beating our socks off in that area. Wifi is good for everyone. So why shouldn't we want it for everyone as a matter of national policy?
Oh, and I do love the hypocrisy of saying that this is "buying votes" (when he hasn't promised to fund it in the first place), but cutting taxes isn't the same thing- right?
Pray tell- what is the difference? I know you support a candidate who promises to cut taxes.