• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ron Paul proposes saving $1T by scrapping five federal departments

Cold Highway said:
More reading

Ron Paul's Radical Deal by Tim Kelly
Click to expand...

look at this excerpt:
To make matters worse, our political rulers appear determined to continue with an imperial foreign policy that includes the overseas deployment of hundreds of thousands of troops, occupying two Muslim countries, maintaining a global network of military bases, bombing defenseless civilians, staging coups, bribing and propping up brutal dictatorial regimes, operating CIA “black sites” where “terrorist suspects” are held indefinitely and routinely tortured, and waging illegal foreign wars on transparently false pretenses. The U.S. government’s belligerent interventionism is not only undermining genuine national security by creating mayhem and stirring up hatred abroad, it is also very expensive, costing the taxpayer more than $1 trillion a year.
Click to expand...

and then notice ron paul's proposal did not impact our military spending
as if there is no fat to be cut there
 
The thing I don't like about how people say "scrap this, scrap that because there's no mention of something in the US constitution" is that they rely upon an outdated document to literally order the government around. Of course, the constitution of any country is to be respected, but the US constituion needs updating, and as times and technology changes, there are things and needs the US founders didn't anticipate.
Any country in the world needs a centralized institution for basic needs for a country, such as Energy, Education, Transportation, etc... Just because the US constitution didn't mention such thing doesn't make that illegal or unnecessary.
Try to be practical
 
Proud South Korean said:
The thing I don't like about how people say "scrap this, scrap that because there's no mention of something in the US constitution" is that they rely upon an outdated document to literally order the government around. Of course, the constitution of any country is to be respected, but the US constituion needs updating, and as times and technology changes, there are things and needs the US founders didn't anticipate.
Any country in the world needs a centralized institution for basic needs for a country, such as Energy, Education, Transportation, etc... Just because the US constitution didn't mention such thing doesn't make that illegal or unnecessary.
Try to be practical
Click to expand...

The constitution may be updated any time the people wish to amend it. There is a process for doing so.

Meanwhile, it is the law of the land, and every official, both federal, state, and local swears an oath to uphold it on taking office.

The law applies even to those who feel it is outdated and inconvenient to their goals.
 
Proud South Korean said:
The thing I don't like about how people say "scrap this, scrap that because there's no mention of something in the US constitution" is that they rely upon an outdated document to literally order the government around. Of course, the constitution of any country is to be respected, but the US constituion needs updating, and as times and technology changes, there are things and needs the US founders didn't anticipate.
Any country in the world needs a centralized institution for basic needs for a country, such as Energy, Education, Transportation, etc... Just because the US constitution didn't mention such thing doesn't make that illegal or unnecessary.
Try to be practical
Click to expand...

Actually, many of the departments can be justified as constitutional via the interstate commerce clause.
 
samsmart said:
Actually, many of the departments can be justified as constitutional via the interstate commerce clause.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll give you the department of commerce. Which others do you think are justified?
 
Centinel said:
The constitution may be updated any time the people wish to amend it. There is a process for doing so.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It has provisions for updating. It does not need to be thrown out and completely re-done.

samsmart said:
Actually, many of the departments can be justified as constitutional via the interstate commerce clause.
Click to expand...
Which is part of the problem... the overly broad and intentionally (IMO) insidious interpretations of the interstate commerce clause.
 
What is this supposed to mean...
"we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it"
 
PeteEU said:
The hell it is... it is very much effected by it all. The US is still the engine of the global economy so any political and economic cluster**** in the US impacts me just as much as anyone else in the world.



So because crime is up that means the police are useless? Because half of Texas is ablaze then pumping money into fighting fires is useless? And the reason education standards have been dropping is because of the political cluster**** the US has been in for a long time.. almost makes Italy look like a bastion of democracy.



So putting even more cost on states is some how a good thing? The very same states that fought tooth an nail to keep segregation? The same states that have politicians that want to ban books, force rape victims to carry their baby and want to outlaw homosexuality if they could get away with it? Those states? I could imagine the homeless rate and ghettos if HUD was not around.. would make a Mexican slum look like Beverly Hills.



Because I have never seen of the story before. But saying that yes 19 million sounds over the top, but regardless a zero G toilet will cost money to develop.. and the US tax paper aint paying the full 19 million.. it is after all a joint venture with a lot of countries.. so fail on that account. You cant just slap a 100 dollar toilet up in zero G.. you can do it in a nuclear sub...



I aint Spanish.. so...



LOL that is your answer for everything aint it? Where does it state in the Constitution that the Federals cant hire private contractors to protect US interests? They do it daily after all...
Click to expand...
Pete, I don't like you, because you're an America hater. So all I can say is, I hope you get your economic ass kicked.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Did you ever think you would see the day that the Republican Party would go so far off the deep end that one of their top tier primary candidates would propose that we do away with the National Park Service (Department of the Interior). National Parks are "America's Best Idea", they are the most American thing the government has ever done, and the Paultards evidently think we need to do away with them.

Vote Ron Paul and you can kiss this goodbye:

250px-1_yosemite_valley_tunnel_view_2010.JPG


Sorry kids we would have gone to Yosemite or Yellowstone or Glacier National Park this year and spend some time visiting our national treasures, but the Republicans did away with the Park Service and sold them to developers, so now they are all being either logged, mined, or being developed into another Vale.

Thank you Ron Paul for saving us from the tyranny of hiking trails, campgrounds, untouched forests, and park rangers.
Click to expand...
Do you have a single shred of evidence that this would happen? No, you don't, and you never will. You're just being a windbag. Budgets have to be cut buddy, get a freaking clue.
 
American said:
Do you have a single shred of evidence that this would happen?
Click to expand...

Nigeria's agony dwarfs the Gulf oil spill. The US and Europe ignore it | Environment | The Observer
Burmanet » The Globe and Mail: Ruthless clear-cutting bares Myanmar

Oh look. American is wrong again.

No, you don't, and you never will. You're just being a windbag. Budgets have to be cut buddy, get a freaking clue.
Click to expand...

You know, if you bothered to open up Google News and read what happens in the rest of the world on occasion, you'd appear less foolish.
 
Centinel said:
The constitution may be updated any time the people wish to amend it. There is a process for doing so.

Meanwhile, it is the law of the land, and every official, both federal, state, and local swears an oath to uphold it on taking office.

The law applies even to those who feel it is outdated and inconvenient to their goals.
Click to expand...

The problem is, that the process is too burdensome and with today's hyperpartisan politics, it will be extremely unlikely to happen.

Ideals and theory aside, the law should be practical above all
 


Worth the hour or so I have heard. I haven't watched it yet as im posting this but heard it covered a lot of topics.
 
Last edited:
Proud South Korean said:
The problem is, that the process is too burdensome and with today's hyperpartisan politics, it will be extremely unlikely to happen.

Ideals and theory aside, the law should be practical above all
Click to expand...

So are you seriously proposing that, because the task of amending the constitution is too burdensome, we should simply disregard it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom