MG1968
That’s No Moon…
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2006
- Messages
- 28,393
- Likes
- 19,328
you gave your opinion. others (republicans too) have the same perception this makes the company money.actually i did respond to this.
have you ever heard the term opportunity cost?
baring the insurance companies going under or the person living till 100 (which happens) the policies do give a positive return to the holder. but there are about 1,000,000 investment products with higher returns hence the reason why the insurance companies aren't going bankrupt by issuing these policies. any company who buys these policies as an investment rather than what htey are, INSURANCE, should fire their CFO immediately.
on top of that, these CEOs lately have really shown they know what they're doing... :crazy:actually i did respond to this.
have you ever heard the term opportunity cost?
baring the insurance companies going under or the person living till 100 (which happens) the policies do give a positive return to the holder. but there are about 1,000,000 investment products with higher returns hence the reason why the insurance companies aren't going bankrupt by issuing these policies. any company who buys these policies as an investment rather than what htey are, INSURANCE, should fire their CFO immediately.
Yeah, I guess going to the moon... Sending spacecraft throughout the galaxy just isn't a success story.
i'm not denying that, but nobody ever claimed space travel to be safe. and WTF, weren't you republicans just complaining about the space program being cut... so on one hand, it is a success story when it can be used to further your cause, but it's not a success story when it goes against your cause.Challenger
Columbia
Apollo 1
Apollo 13 (a successful failure, but a failure nonetheless)
Constellation
Skylab
numerous probes that either crash landed or failed to operate properly.
yes, NASA has had success, but it's failures aren't exactly the kind you shrug off and say, "oh well, better luck next time."
I would agree for the most part... To me, we just got to find the right balance between the two. 100 percent either way is a dangerous situation.Government can do somethings better than the market but the list is very small.
When government tries to substitute for the market it is generally a disaster.