 Ok i have 300 dollars how should i invest it? |
i have 300 dollars i want to invest it in for about a year lol
whats the way to go ??? bonds??
whats the best thing to ... |
|
 Is it possible for me to make millions of dollars investing on australian stock market? |
| if i invest a 5 figure amount into australian stock market buying and sellng many shares as a day trader, " will i become a get enough to buy a nice family home"?... |
|
 How does my stock trading plan sound to you? |
| I have $30,000 that I would like to invest in. I figure out at any given time, I will own 3 stocks ($10,000 invested in each stock), and then sell it off when it goes up at least 1%....that would be $... |
|
 I'm a very, very novice investor what stock could i start out investing in? |
| I'm not rich, just an average American. I was wondering if anyone could give me any advice on what stock(s) to invest in? Is now even a good time to invest with the state of the economy?... |
|
 Am I an idiot? |
| I placed a limit order for MNCS at $3.78. Very shortly, the price was over $4, but my limit order still hadn't gone through. While waiting to see what was going to happen, I got on Y! answers ... |
|
 Why do people trade in stock market? |
Additional Details
The main reasons of trading in stock markets. It can be considered as individuals' point of view and corporative's point of view as well.... |
|
 Forex? What is Forex? Is it profitable? |
i've found this site yesterday.
a lot information i got there.
http://pipsmaker.blogspo
is it true?
anybody knew more?
any suggestion which site i can learn more?... |
|
 How & where can i open a demat a/c ? |
Which banks are demat a/c service providers ?
Guide ... |
|
|  |
matrushka2525 | Are you willing to pay higher taxes if both your education and health care services we provided for free? |
|
 |
 
Common_Sense_is_Uncommon
|
If you're paying higher taxes, then it's not "free" is it?
Your question should be : "Are you willing to take home less of your paycheck than you do now in order to provide education and health care?"
My answer would be no on education. Every time more money goes towards it, it seems to always get diverted to the "general fund" and never specifically towards education. If you mean for college, then absolutely not. People don't HAVE to go to college if they don't want to. Why pay more for something that you KNOW a large number of people aren't even going to use? And don't kid yourself that "if it was free, then everyone would go." No, they wouldn't and you'd be giving free money to colleges to do nothing.
For health care, the answer is "possibly", as long as there were specific provisions that limited the spending of these funds to health insurance only; no dipping into it in "emergencies", no diverting any monies to special projects, no borrowing, no general fund........nothing; just the health care program and 100% of the money goes to the program. What the government SHOULD do is create their own provider (the United States Insurance Corporation, or something like that) where the government is the guarantor and insurance is provided (quite literally) to anyone who does not have it or does not have sufficient coverage.
It shouldn't be that hard for Congress to figure out how to insure the 20% of the population that aren't currently covered. Giving them more money and trying to nationalize the system goes directly against the free market economy and against common sense if anyone thinks that our government would do even a half-way decent job of creating such a national program. |
|
anniebell
 |
well it really wouldn't be free, now would it? |
|
slavaret2
 |
NO.
Not interested in socialism in any shape or form. How many failures do you need to get that right? |
|
jimbobbighouse
|
NO.
You involve the government in paying for education and healthcare, you are setting yourself up for disaster (inefficiency).
The only way to foster the right kind of change in the healthcare system is to make it a consumer-based system. Remove the government, remove the intermediaries. Their only role should be that of regulator / overseer, not the people who decide if your claims should be approved or if you should receive some form of medical treatment. |
|
snwbm
|
No, with our corrupt govt. we would wind up paying more because of collusion, hemeraging of govt. funds, and misappropriation. |
|
zioncanyon
|
no |
|
Super Girl
|
Simply yes. Health care and education should be a given, a right. Not a privilege. It is a disgrace that this country can spend billions at war but not take care of its own citizens. |
|
trader
|
NO. You will never get back what you give the government. There is so much miss handling and waste of our funds that you will only get a small portion of what is put into the proposed new health care system. Keep all that you can in your own pockets and use it wisely. The government has always miss used funds including those supposedly only for social security. Instead of supporting and helping American citizens with our tax dollars, they are now using our tax dollars to help illegal aliens. |
|
bob_frangione2000
|
You bet. It is high time we got something for our taxes. |
|
Big A
|
Our education is free but I think you mean college, yea I would |
|
Andy
 |
I'm always amused by people's concerns about "government wastefulness" and "bureaucracy" -- as if big corporations weren't wasteful and bureaucratic as well. The fact is, health costs would be lower without the administrative and marketing costs incurred by all the private insurance companies and related firms involved in health care -- including all those consultants helping firms maximize profits by penalizing doctors who spend more than 7 minutes with their patients.
So the answer is yes -- national health care is a positive and works around the globe. It would also help our corporations compete globally because now the cost of health care has to be factored in to the price they charge for their products. National health care might be the only thing that can save our auto industry.
Various elites have been attacking our public education system for years in an attempt to dismantle it completely. In my own (radical) view, this is to create a more permanent underclass than the one we have now. Their goal is to make sure that only the wealthy can afford to educate their children -- with the exception of a few extraordinarily intelligent tokens from the underclass. This goal is parallel to the disparity of wealth being created by taxation and corporate compensation policies. (Consider how much your ability to accumulate wealth is penalized by your student loan balance.)
These negative trends are the result of our society adopting a "winner-take-all" value system, something that has been relentlessly promoted by the media with its emphasis on "stars" -- sports, celebrity, CEO, whatever. The fact is that social mobility in America is now below that of a number of European countries; and if you know your European history, you can appreciate how truly astounding a fact that is. |
|
BRENT H
 |
Sure, why not, if that system would actually work. It would just totally destroy our economy and the services would be horrible. The government can't trash pickup service right, why would anybody trust them to control healthcare. You think emergency rooms are slow now, just wait. |
|
| |
|
| | |
| Questions List |
Answers | Last Post
| | | |
12 | 15 minutes(s) ago
| | | |
11 | 29 minutes(s) ago
| | | |
13 | 41 minutes(s) ago
| | | |
12 | 2 hour(s) ago
| | | |
11 | 5 hour(s) ago
| | | |
12 | 6 hour(s) ago
| | | |
12 | 9 hour(s) ago
| | | |
12 | 10 hour(s) ago
| | | |
11 | 1 day(s) ago
| | | |
12 | 2 day(s) ago
| |
|
Homepage 
Financial
Forum 
Investing 
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
