Time to gloat

mrgybe · Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5181

It's been my experience that people beyond high school age who say that the place they live is "the best", do so because they haven't lived in many places.

boggsman1 · Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9122 Location: at a computer

I'm happy for you. The Bay Area is one of the only places where people move here for the lifestyle.. I will venture you chose the DC area because of your profession, most do. Every day I commute home on the ferry with a view of the golden gate, past Alcatraz and Angel island , and end up at the base of Mt Tam, I count my blessings. The only other towns I would live in are Portland and Denver..

nw30 · Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:43 pm Post subject:

isobars · Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935

boggsman1 · Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9122 Location: at a computer

I disagree .. As long as insurance is structured as such, I believe people should have to pay for their sins. If you want less of something , tax it!!! It drives me crazy when see moms letting their kids suck down Cokes, knowing it will come back to haunt them later in life... Then the fat kid, loses his self esteem, doesn't do well in school, can't make a good living, then gets called a moocher by the right because he's sucking on the teet of Guvmint. Tax the sinners!!! I'm not paying for them .

mac · Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2014 5:19 pm Post subject:

Consistency is too much to expect out of self styled "conservatives", and particularly out of the sage of the Central Coast. Opposed to sin taxes, eh. That makes you someone that favors transferring the risks to the rest of us? But only for light weight stuff--like heart disease and cancer (tobacco causes much more than lung cancer deaths), diabetes, emergency room care, and the cost of dealing with sea level rise? Some conservative--you actually favor subsidizing those that damage other people's property and health for higher profits.

The people apologizing for advertising sugar to kids are the same people who advertised cigarettes to children. They love having you on their side, and transferring the risk to the general public and the profits to their share holders. Are you one?

Glad to be among the 75% in Berkeley who see through this nonsense. We will eventually force an end to advertising deadly products to children.

nw30 · Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:54 pm Post subject:

So willing to let the parents off.
For A) not being educated enough, or smart enough to know how to parent, who's problem is that?
And B) without the proper education, or just being lazy, to not be able to properly teach their children how to eat or act.

Just tax those parents more so they have less to spend on the good stuff, they still will buy the bad stuff regardless, always do. The vast majority of those who smoke for instance, are of lower income.