1 - 10 Next
NO!!!! Policemen might accidentally kill the criminals if they are allowed to have guns! Just give them shiny badges! Of course, politicians will have guns. It's necessary for their protection. Besides, criminals will always have guns.
In response to:

A Penalty for Harry

Kris12 Wrote: Jan 24, 2013 7:40 PM
I propose that the United States Congress and Senate be treated as a board of directors under the terms of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002. This act provides criminal and civil penalties for dereliction of duty, failure of due diligence, and accounting crimes.
In response to:

Dave Says Hold that Cash

Kris12 Wrote: Jan 22, 2013 10:00 PM
In the long run, you are right, paying off the loans would save lots of money, especially if it's a high interest rate like a credit card account. The problem with your reasoning is that the long run only matters if you survive the short term issues you are facing. Paying off debt now, then being unable to secure a loan later if they can't get a new loan would likely end up causing financial ruin. They might be forced to declare bankruptcy, lose nearly everything, and face sky high interest rates for years as they rebuild their credit. Oh, and the bombed out credit score will also make it difficult for him to get a job, since many employers check credit scores these days before hiring.
In response to:

Dave Says Hold that Cash

Kris12 Wrote: Jan 22, 2013 9:52 PM
Ramsey is right on this one. With the husband out of a job, and possibly for an extended time due to his injury, they need this money to live on. It would be foolish to pay off debt now, because there is no way to know how long it will be until he is working again, and as long as he is unemployed the chance of being able to secure a new loan is basically zero. Kristen might have her own source of income, but it will likely not be enough to cover expenses if they have been living on two incomes long enough to get used to it. Any lender would look at the ratio of income to expenses as a definite red flag to their ability to repay. When you have great unknowns like this, the best thing to do is make cash last as long as it can.
In response to:

Anti-American Asians Don't Speak for Me

Kris12 Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 7:11 AM
"The song – from eight years ago – was part of a deeply emotional reaction to the war in Iraq and the killing of two innocent Korean civilians that was part of the overall antiwar sentiment shared by others around the world at that time." - PSY Seems pretty specific to me . . .
In response to:

Anti-American Asians Don't Speak for Me

Kris12 Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 7:00 AM
In PSY's defense, although his apology was brief it also seemed genuine. It was basically a claim that he was young, stupid, and angry. The only Americans he knew were the soldiers that the media demonized, and he believed the media. Since then he has had a chance to travel outside of South Korea and meet real Americans, and his opinion of them has changed. He wishes he had never said those things now. You don't need a long winded discourse, he offered a straight up apology for his past without anybody asking. You don't really think the White House demanded he issue an apology do you?
Not just that, they should sue Washington DC for damages due to lost wages and defamation. Having a weapons violation on your record makes it virtually impossible to find a decent job. I'm sure that all 105 of these people have incurred significant financial losses and damages from the smearing of their reputations for something that, it turns out, should involve no fine, jail time, or prosecution.
Walk away, there's no need for Plan B or anything else. You've already passed bills that will avert the fiscal cliff. Remember, too, when the Democrats come demanding that the debt ceiling be raised. Tell them, "You wouldn't cut spending even a little in December, you HAVE to cut spending now."
Come on, if the Prez is gonna throw in an unconstitutional power grab, we gotta counter with the same. Otherwise it isn't "fair"
The Republicans should counter with a proposal for a return of all federal expenditures to 2007 levels, a removal of all baseline increases, a complete elimination of funding for the department of education and the national endowment for the arts, and the president's surrender of the right to appoint Federal judges, cabinet members, and ambassadors. Then tell everyone that your not dead set on the national endowment for the arts if you can get a good enough deal from the Democrats.
1 - 10 Next
Monday, May 20 | 04:46 AM ET
Monday, May 20 | 04:46 AM ET
Monday, May 20 | 04:46 AM ET
Monday, May 20 | 04:46 AM ET