Quote:
Originally Posted by algrace
Aaaha...here's the reason for the post. Now I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but if I do it shouldn't hurt. I hear you may have had your foot in there a while.
You want to pay taxes only for programs which have a direct benefit to you. What is in the interest of the public is not always in the interest of the individual. If you were to lobby or hold public office, you would likely be judging expenditure decisions with more information.
The strongest argument for publicly funded assistance programs is the indirect benefit(s) reaped by those paying into the system with the belief they are not seeing the benefit.
Some call it socialism. Some call it faith. While I am not foolhardy enough to believe that my tax dollars are being spent effectively, I cannot currently imagine arguing against public assistance programs on this board. I won't disagree that there are certainly more efficient ways of your tax dollar providing benefit to you. I suggest, however, that your tax dollar is not meant to benefit you as much as it is meant to benefit those less fortunate.
|
When I say," programs which have a direct
benefit to me" I don't mean "me", I mean the majority. so if that is what the people want, then ok, I don't think its very smart,same as I dont think repelling mrs obamas new lunch laws are smart.
Maybe we all out to be paying for new roads?
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...r-a-crazy-idea
taxes are to help the unfortunate? No, not at all, thats what charities are for.
A tax dollar is not meant to help those less fortunate, it to go into a pot and help other tax payers; it is for the majority to decide what to fund. but that's not how the system is set up, and lots of ways the system is set up is not in the best interest of the country, but to get the politicians back in office.,
I mostly think about taxes etc when I pay for schools...I saw a news story about Congress trying to repeal the new lunches...aww pooor kids
750 calories is NOT enough calories?
750x 3 meals=2250 calories, seems to fit in nicely
Classes are boring, we need to make math more like a drinking math game!
edit:
I guess I was wrong,
The new
school lunch regulations, which
first lady Michelle Obama championed and a Democrat-led Congress passed in 2010, set a maximum calorie limit for high school lunches at between 750 and 850 calories. Under the old rules, cafeterias served a minimum of 825 calories per lunch.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/...ry?id=17324285
I get kids being hungry after eating those fruit/.veggie healthy meals
I eat 2 shakes a day,(usually) One pound broccoli
tumeric(pinch)
cinnimon(pinch)
Handful arugula
Four cloves garlic
Half a bag of rhubarb
handful spinach
4 ounces of pomegranate juice
45 g of egg whites
I mix it all in a vitamix and then drink it....that's about 800 calories and afterward, I am still hungry, but that's cause I'm eating good food and not sugar and fat.(I take my W-3s though)
BEFORE
AFTER
the science
CONCLUSIONS
The DASH diet forms the basis for public dietary health
recommendations in the United States (eg, MyPyramid.gov) and
is widely recommended by private health agencies, such as the
American Heart Association (101). Taken together, the data
considered here support the conclusions of the European Food
Safety Authority (66) that benefits of vegetable and fruit con-
sumption outweigh any perceived risk of developing cancer from
the consumption of nitrate and nitrite in these foods. Note that the
nitrate and nitrite concentrations measured in our convenience
sample may differ from samples taken from more disparate
geographic locations. We conclude that the data on nitrate and
nitrite contents of vegetables and fruit bolster the strength of
existing evidence to recommend their consumption for health
benefits.
Despite the demonstration of physiologic roles for nitrate and
nitrite in vascular and immune function, food sources of nitrates
and nitrites as healthful dietary components have received little
attention (18). The questionable practice of causal inference with
regard to the etiologic roles of dietary nitrates and nitrites in
methemoglobinemia and cancer has exerted a detrimental effect
on research supporting the health benefits of nitrate- and nitrite-
containing foods. This has occurred despite the observed benefits
of nitrate and nitrite in medical therapeutics (102). Indeed, data
from observational epidemiologic and human clinical studies
support the hypothesis that nitrates and nitrites of plant origin
play essential physiologic roles in supporting cardiovascular
health and gastrointestinal immune function. We support the
recent call for a multidisciplinary and systematic review of the
biological consequences of dietary nitrate and nitrite consump-
tion (84). The strength of the evidence linking the consumption of
nitrate- and nitrite-containing plant foods to beneficial health
effects supports the consideration of these compounds as
nutrient
