- This topic has 85 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 17, 2011 at 2:44 PM #679169March 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM #678046
enron_by_the_sea
ParticipantBrian:
The smart thing Dems could do is to get out of the way of tea party and give them what they want. Sooner or later they will overreach (just like how Dems themselves overreached in 2009.)
March 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM #678101ParticipantBrian:
The smart thing Dems could do is to get out of the way of tea party and give them what they want. Sooner or later they will overreach (just like how Dems themselves overreached in 2009.)
March 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM #678704ParticipantBrian:
The smart thing Dems could do is to get out of the way of tea party and give them what they want. Sooner or later they will overreach (just like how Dems themselves overreached in 2009.)
March 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM #678838ParticipantBrian:
The smart thing Dems could do is to get out of the way of tea party and give them what they want. Sooner or later they will overreach (just like how Dems themselves overreached in 2009.)
March 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM #679179ParticipantBrian:
The smart thing Dems could do is to get out of the way of tea party and give them what they want. Sooner or later they will overreach (just like how Dems themselves overreached in 2009.)
March 17, 2011 at 8:35 PM #678146briansd1
GuestIs anyone watching Celtic Thunder on PBS? It’s like pop music toned down for old people.
20+ years ago, they had Lawrence Welk as a fund-raising draw. Yeah, I’m hopelessly liberal. I’ve been watching PBS and listening to NPR from a young age.
March 17, 2011 at 8:35 PM #678202GuestIs anyone watching Celtic Thunder on PBS? It’s like pop music toned down for old people.
20+ years ago, they had Lawrence Welk as a fund-raising draw. Yeah, I’m hopelessly liberal. I’ve been watching PBS and listening to NPR from a young age.
March 17, 2011 at 8:35 PM #678802GuestIs anyone watching Celtic Thunder on PBS? It’s like pop music toned down for old people.
20+ years ago, they had Lawrence Welk as a fund-raising draw. Yeah, I’m hopelessly liberal. I’ve been watching PBS and listening to NPR from a young age.
March 17, 2011 at 8:35 PM #678937GuestIs anyone watching Celtic Thunder on PBS? It’s like pop music toned down for old people.
20+ years ago, they had Lawrence Welk as a fund-raising draw. Yeah, I’m hopelessly liberal. I’ve been watching PBS and listening to NPR from a young age.
March 17, 2011 at 8:35 PM #679281GuestIs anyone watching Celtic Thunder on PBS? It’s like pop music toned down for old people.
20+ years ago, they had Lawrence Welk as a fund-raising draw. Yeah, I’m hopelessly liberal. I’ve been watching PBS and listening to NPR from a young age.
March 17, 2011 at 9:30 PM #678160temeculaguy
ParticipantWhy does your headline say “sciences?”
Just because the government doesn’t fund it doesn’t mean it won’t exist.
So to answer your question:
Science: It depends.
Some things are needed by the people but not profitable so industry won’t deliver, in those cases, I’m OK with the government stepping up. 200 million for autism research in this years budget is an example of where I support it. The answer to that and many other diseases may not end up being something a company can sell, so there’s not a business model, but solving certain medical riddles will ultimately benefit the populace and the government’s future budget. A good deal of these grants go to universities, other innovations tend to spin off from these research projects and many of those lead to more revenues for the government, so it’s easy to make that argument.
Art: No.
Sorry, it’s a consumer product, let the consumer pay for it. If nobody wants to pay to see it or buy it, then we can live without it.
March 17, 2011 at 9:30 PM #678216ParticipantWhy does your headline say “sciences?”
Just because the government doesn’t fund it doesn’t mean it won’t exist.
So to answer your question:
Science: It depends.
Some things are needed by the people but not profitable so industry won’t deliver, in those cases, I’m OK with the government stepping up. 200 million for autism research in this years budget is an example of where I support it. The answer to that and many other diseases may not end up being something a company can sell, so there’s not a business model, but solving certain medical riddles will ultimately benefit the populace and the government’s future budget. A good deal of these grants go to universities, other innovations tend to spin off from these research projects and many of those lead to more revenues for the government, so it’s easy to make that argument.
Art: No.
Sorry, it’s a consumer product, let the consumer pay for it. If nobody wants to pay to see it or buy it, then we can live without it.
March 17, 2011 at 9:30 PM #678817ParticipantWhy does your headline say “sciences?”
Just because the government doesn’t fund it doesn’t mean it won’t exist.
So to answer your question:
Science: It depends.
Some things are needed by the people but not profitable so industry won’t deliver, in those cases, I’m OK with the government stepping up. 200 million for autism research in this years budget is an example of where I support it. The answer to that and many other diseases may not end up being something a company can sell, so there’s not a business model, but solving certain medical riddles will ultimately benefit the populace and the government’s future budget. A good deal of these grants go to universities, other innovations tend to spin off from these research projects and many of those lead to more revenues for the government, so it’s easy to make that argument.
Art: No.
Sorry, it’s a consumer product, let the consumer pay for it. If nobody wants to pay to see it or buy it, then we can live without it.
March 17, 2011 at 9:30 PM #678952ParticipantWhy does your headline say “sciences?”
Just because the government doesn’t fund it doesn’t mean it won’t exist.
So to answer your question:
Science: It depends.
Some things are needed by the people but not profitable so industry won’t deliver, in those cases, I’m OK with the government stepping up. 200 million for autism research in this years budget is an example of where I support it. The answer to that and many other diseases may not end up being something a company can sell, so there’s not a business model, but solving certain medical riddles will ultimately benefit the populace and the government’s future budget. A good deal of these grants go to universities, other innovations tend to spin off from these research projects and many of those lead to more revenues for the government, so it’s easy to make that argument.
Art: No.
Sorry, it’s a consumer product, let the consumer pay for it. If nobody wants to pay to see it or buy it, then we can live without it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.