Exactly. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick McClure [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:29 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart
> 
> OK, so in this case. Say the government makes a deal, and 
> they bring in a big store, that store creates jobs that 
> weren't there before. It provides items that weren't 
> available before, and provides other items at a better cost 
> than before.
> 
> Doesn't this benefit the individual?
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:22 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart
> > 
> > If you're for smaller gov't, shouldn't the local gov't not 
> be getting 
> > involved in the free market?
> > 
> > Those tax breaks give wal-mart an unfair advantage over other local 
> > businesses. So its gov't intruding into the free-market. And road 
> > construction isn't cheap. When was the last time a state redid 
> > highways just for a mom and pop shop?
> > 
> > I'm still hearing that gov't benefitting corporations is good while 
> > gov't benefitting individuals is bad.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:192731
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to