hmm when exactly did we try smaller government?

 

1776

Eric

 

We tried smaller government when we deregulated the banking industry, the rich got richer and the poor tried to live like the rich and the bank made tons and tons of money by loaning money to people who could not afford it because they could then turn around and insure those bad loans.
Had the R's not deregulated the banks it never would have happened.

 

because if you make 500$ a week of course you have for your bills to average 700.

Stupid people should suffer their own consequences

 

You mean the regulation that the bush wh called for in 01 02 03 ? The regulation of Freddie and fanny that the dems blocked ? The regulation they said was not needed ? This is not open to debate, this regulation was blocked then and then completely floored once the house/senate were lost to the dems in the mid terms. Not starting a fight, but let's be accurate in the reporting.

 

No, No, NO........ You are confused. Jimmy Carter and ***** Clinton extended loans to those that would not have qualified under normal circumstances. I will say however that the Bush admin had the opportunity to reverse this before it was to late, however did not want to be accused of "preventing the poor from housing opportunities". Because that's how the pinko commi's operate.

As to your emission test..... I don't like them at all. Ada county (Boise) has emission tests, however Valley and Canyon county do not have emission tests. So the people of Boise have to deal with them but the commuters from Nampa, Meridian, Eagle, Caldwell and Ontario do not. It's not about clean air, its about squeezing every goddamn red cent they can out of you.

I avoid this by not doing my emission tests. The registration on my rover is from 09. They have to catch me first!!!

 

WHOA there Idaho!..take it easy with the facts, we don't want to overwhelm those that get all their news from the lamestream media.

Next you'll be telling us that DEMOCRATIC representative Barney frank, chairman of the financial services committee, was involved in some kind of homosexual relationship with a Fannie Mae executive..received more than $40,00 in campaign donations from Fannie Mae and repeatedly announced that Fannie Mae was in no danger of collapsing just before the collapse.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...924145932.aspx

 

Back on topic, I personally still find it CRAZY that you still have places in the US that dont require emissions testing.............its madness, if your driving your polluting.........

EVERY vehicle should be emissions tested, thats the only fair way.

 

And that's why we don't live in the UK.
Why is it our government considers diesel "dirty" and yet they're all over Europe?
And yet we're the ones destroying the Earth.... hmmmm....

Eric

 

I have been enjoying the discourse in this thread. I fall on the side of the people who favor smaller government and I definately consider myself to be a conservative.

Not necessarily a Republican but a conservative.

As far as who has to test and where, if the goal is to reduce "global warming" (if that really exists), then I feel that every vehicle that "pollutes" the air should be tested.

It shouldn't matter if you live in a high density population area or in a rural one, if you drive you pollute and contribute to the problem.

I live in a town that has less than 2,500 residents and only has two stop lights.

I drive my Disco less than 5,000 miles a year since I own my own business and work from home most of the time.

My contribution to the "problem" is probably a lot less than many rural dwellers who drive all over creation to get to work or the nearest city, or the city folk who drive all over creation to get away from the city.

Bottom line is I totally agree with the poster who said that this is actually a money grab.

If you live in California then you are very familiar with all the crazy taxes and fees imposed upon its residents.