Joe Heller by Joe Heller

Joe Heller

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Big Agriculture makes the biggest profits off the program, as well as it’s other “relatives” in Dept. of Agriculture programs.

  2. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 3 years ago

    It’s a well known fact that conservatives give a lot more to charity than liberals.
    Maybe all the whining Dems should start supporting their local charities.

  3. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, about 3 years ago

    Charities make welcome but uneven contributions to the health and well being of the nation. Their assistance depends on who’s donating to whom for what. If you’ve got malaria, say, Bill Gates will likely help. Otherwise, however, local, State and Federal governments are better placed to assist the majority of people toward Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, old Tommy J put a nice ring in those words.

  4. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 3 years ago

    " Why are not the loony liberal up in arms about that?"

    I can only speak for one loony liberal: it’s better to try to achieve something valuable and fail than to never try. If nothing else, you learn and adapt.

    Ask the Wright Brothers whether they flew the first time they tried. But air travel, as we all know, has no value in the real world these days…..

  5. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 3 years ago

    I love these supposed conservatives that insist that we shouldn’t be providing food through private businesses and grocery stores, per the SNAP program, but through nonprofits, where no private businesses are making any money. Reality check: letting poor Americans starve is actually bad for the economy, and unlike the ACA, it actually, measurably, kills jobs.

  6. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 3 years ago


    Nobody in America starves to death. That’s a fact.

  7. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 3 years ago

    I will accept your premise, but I still hold to mine. I will be happy to accept progress, regardless of the reasons for same.

    We have no choice but to find alternative energy sources. We cannot afford to continue a fossil-fuel-based economy, both in terms of pollution, and geopolitically.

    I just read an article where the US Navy has been working up what it will cost to ensure that the Norfolk Naval Station will be able to continue through the end of the century, factoring in the rising of the seas, and the need to make facilities able to withstand more powerful storms. The costs will run into the hundreds of billions. I know there are science-deniers out there, and I know that climate will change whether we contribute or not. I also know that every other major change in climate history took millions of years, not fewer than 100. And the US Navy seems to believe that there will be serious consequences to continuing a fossil-fuel-based society.

    So I will restate for the record: regardless of reason, if we can find a way to go greener, I’m for it. And, as with all technology, there will be false starts along the way.

  8. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 3 years ago

    Sure Bill Gates could spend all his money in nothing flat! All he has to do is start acting like a politician and the government!

  9. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 3 years ago

    I am unfamiliar with your references of Little Ice Age, and the freezing of the Thames. Sorry. I know that the Atlantic Ocean froze out about 100 yards in the early 20th Century off Virginia Beach, but isolated incidents are not the same as climate change, to my knowledge.

    Although there are always shysters, the researchers I know do their research with the scientific method, and do not tailor their results to match pre-determined conclusions. Your experience may be different.

    I would love to see private industry do this. If it does, it will not be American private industry; are you willing to allow other countries to once again outmaneuver us for technology?

    Do you think that transistors, integrated circuits, and fuel cells would have been developed as quickly without NASA’s cash infusions?

    Trusting the energy companies, which are about the only private enterprise with the wherewithal to fund energy R&D, to come up with alternative energy sources is about as valuable as trusting OJ Simpson to spend the rest of his life “looking for the real killers”. And the energy companies are awash in government tax breaks and subsidies.

    After 30+ years of being a doctor, after 10 years in the same town gaining a reputation, when I realized that the practice I had joined was toxic enough to put my license in jeopardy, I went out on my own. Finding a bank willing to allow me a business line of credit was next to impossible, and I provide a service that people demonstrably need and want TODAY. How well will a start-up solar-panel company be able to absorb initial costs and marketplace inertia and the wait for the technology to be accepted on a large scale, allowing for reasonable prices to the public, if there is no available investment capital?

    While I agree that government loans should be non-guaranteed, and that there should be some responsibility for default, I cannot agree that if we just give rich people tax credits those industries will magically appear.

    I also believe that if the feds diverted the same number of billions to alternative energy companies that it presently does to the oil companies, we’d be seeing wind, solar, and wave energy taking over in a big hurry.

    I agree the game needs to be changed, but we can’t change the game with the same old rules.

  10. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    I didn’t realize ConAgra and Monsanto, et al, were charities.

  11. tabonsell

    tabonsell said, about 3 years ago


    That is not “a well known fact” to people who can read. So try again.

    What the study you think says that actually says is that total giving includes that given to churches.

    It is a well known fact that conservatives are more religious because they can’t explain reality without an invisible man in the sky who created everything with only mind power. It is also a well known fact that most churches use most of their income to provide a luxurious life style for the preacher.

    Take away the amount of money given to churches and you get a well known fact that liberals give more to charity than do conservatives.

  12. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    Bill Gates has so much money he couldn’t possibly spend it all in a lifetime.
    Ask the tens of thousands of tech professionals in this country who have had their jobs off-shored because of Gates directly, and indirectly by his seminars preaching, literally, “Find A Job to Ship Overseas Today”.

  13. Ramona Winkelbauer

    Ramona Winkelbauer said, almost 3 years ago


    Or, hire a tech professional without American citizenship (aka, increase the H1B caps) because the IT professional that knows COBOL can’t learn Java according to Bill.

  14. Refresh Comments.