To: raybbr
Why is preserving the health of children in any country anathema to so many here? We are the richest nation on the planet, why shouldn't we help the down-trodden?
I'd rather we spent money on those babies than give it to crack whores.
11 posted on
07/12/2003 11:32:51 AM PDT by
annyokie
(Admin Moderator has got it in for me.)
To: annyokie
Who says we support giving it to crack whores?
I don't support stealing people's money and giving it to anyone. But I especially hate sending it to third world sewers.
To: annyokie
It's unconstitutional. Not that it matters anymore...
To: annyokie
It's not that it's anethema, it's just a waste of money. The people receiving the money are not going to change their ways just becuase we send some money their way.
16 posted on
07/12/2003 11:48:12 AM PDT by
raybbr
To: annyokie
preserving the health of children in any country Exactly. There are over a billion children in the world under the age of 15, and I believe the US taxpayer is responsible for the health of every last one of them.
I think spending only $1000 dollars per year for each child is a trivial amount -- we're talking about a human child here, after all.
That works out to 1 trillion dollars, which is roughly a 50% increase in all taxes across the board. Income tax -- up 50%. Social security tax -- up 50%. Corporate tax -- up 50 %.
But remember, it's for the children.
21 posted on
07/12/2003 11:58:33 AM PDT by
7DayRepo
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson