Limits to government interference

[code1211]

None at all; well regulated militias of the United States have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

So, when you say this:

"All right wingers seem to know how to do is appeal to obsolete authority (which is usually considered a fallacy) instead of appealing to plain reason and legal axioms. Simple logic and simple reason seems difficult for some on the right wing."

What are you talking about?

 

[vegas giants]

Sorry. Both sources are paywalled. I'm not going to pay for propaganda.

Here's a link that discusses the lies published by both Izvestia and Pravda- whoopsie! I mean, the NYT and WaPo.

You might recall. Maybe not. These lying butt holes reported without shame or accuracy every rumor they could create and when they were shown to be wrong, they just shouted the same lies louder.

It's possible that there are STILL some ridiculously stupid morons that STILL believe the lies they were told about this.

Trump: Pulitzer Prizes on Russia 'Collusion' Should Be Returned, 'They Were All Wrong' | CNSNews

REMINDER: WaPo, NYT Won Pulitzers For Russia Collusion Reporting | The Daily Wire

So opinion pieces.

 

[danielpalos]

So, when you say this:

"All right wingers seem to know how to do is appeal to obsolete authority (which is usually considered a fallacy) instead of appealing to plain reason and legal axioms. Simple logic and simple reason seems difficult for some on the right wing."

What are you talking about?

I just explained it to you in the previous post. We have to quibble because our supreme law of the land is express not implied in any way.

 

[code1211]

So opinion pieces.

It's difficult to present evidence for a thing that does not exist.

For instance, can you present evidence for the cooperation provided by the Trump Campaign that the lying morons at the Columbia never found to justify giving a Pulitzer Prize to the lying morons who also did not find any?

If you can, you'll be doing the thing that the FBI, the CIA, the NIA, the NYT, CNN and any other alphabet swindle organization has found to be impossible.

The FBI and the CIA the COTUS along with our entire "Journalism" Community resorted to just plain making crap up on the one hand and hiding the real facts on the other.

You will, I suspect, do the same. At least you'll be with folks that share your ethics.

 

[vegas giants]

It's difficult to present evidence for a thing that does not exist.

For instance, can you present evidence for the cooperation provided by the Trump Campaign that the lying morons at the Columbia never found to justify giving a Pulitzer Prize to the lying morons who also did not find any?

If you can, you'll be doing the thing that the FBI, the CIA, the NIA, the NYT, CNN and any other alphabet swindle organization has found to be impossible.

The FBI and the CIA the COTUS along with our entire "Journalism" Community resorted to just plain making crap up on the one hand and hiding the real facts on the other.

You will, I suspect, do the same. At least you'll be with folks that share your ethics.

You have an opinion. Nothing more

 

[code1211]

I just explained it to you in the previous post. We have to quibble because our supreme law of the land is express not implied in any way.

So you again say nothing and feel like you said something.

I'm detecting a repeating theme.

 

[danielpalos]

So you again say nothing and feel like you said something.

I'm detecting a repeating theme.

I am detecting you understand nothing and insist on repeating the historical mistake of not asking (relevant) questions to better ascertain any Sublime Truth (value) through understanding the argumentation.

 

[code1211]

You have an opinion. Nothing more

My opinion is that no facts showing any connection whatever between the Trump Campaign for President and "The Russians" exists.

I hold that opinion for the same reason that I hold the opinion that no evidence exists that Space Aliens have landed on the White House Lawn.

When no evidence exists, then no evidence exists.

You, like Adam Schiff, seem to be saying that evidence DOES exist.

Whatcha got?

 

[code1211]

I am detecting you understand nothing and insist on repeating the historical mistake of not asking (relevant) questions to better ascertain any Sublime Truth (value) through understanding the argumentation.

Please clearly state the "sublime truth" you labor to relay.

 

[danielpalos]

Please clearly state the "sublime truth" you labor to relay.

We subscribe to Capitalism and have a Constitution and supreme Law of the land. Our welfare clause is General to provide for solutions not excuses. We should promote the general welfare whenever possible.

Plain reason and legal axioms tell us that Government must be a form of socialism (social-ism) simply Because Congress Commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy pursuant to fiscal policy goals and directives.

Equality in our Republic means equal protection of the laws even with our subscription to capitalism. One form of equality is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States. We should have no homelessness in our first world Republic, especially since our elected representatives have no authority to deny or disparage our privilege and immunities through unequal protection of the laws.

 

[code1211]

We subscribe to Capitalism and have a Constitution and supreme Law of the land. Our welfare clause is General to provide for solutions not excuses. We should promote the general welfare whenever possible.

Plain reason and legal axioms tell us that Government must be a form of socialism (social-ism) simply Because Congress Commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy pursuant to fiscal policy goals and directives.

Equality in our Republic means equal protection of the laws even with our subscription to capitalism. One form of equality is equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States. We should have no homelessness in our first world Republic, especially since our elected representatives have no authority to deny or disparage our privilege and immunities through unequal protection of the laws.

You argument is based on a misunderstanding.

"Provide for the general welfare" does not mean to feed the hungry, house the homeless and cloth the naked. That is Christianity, not the Federal Government.

The duty of our government is to allow the free pursuit of happiness, not to guarantee the successful attainment of happiness.

Capitalism is the economic model used within our Republic. It succeeds because it relies on individual reward for individual effort. Simple. Direct. Self sustaining.

Capitalism is regulated to assure that everyone is protected from being compelled to buy the same thing. It is perverted when everyone IS forced to buy the same thing.

At the time of the ratification of the US Constitution, there was no welfare that supported individuals needing temporary or permanent financial support. OBVIOUSLY what you interpret "welfare" to mean is not what the meaning was at the time.

That part of your argument is thereby shown to be obviously empty, baseless and imagined by perverters of the thoughts of the Framers.

You go on. You seem to say that all people be provided with a home regardless of effort, responsibility, desire or request. What if a person specifically desires NO home? In your dystopia, do you imprison that person in a home he doesn't want?

Beyond that, do you assess property taxes on that unwanted home and do you then imprison him in a real prison if he refuses to pay the tax?

In Indianapolis where I live, there are lake shore homes with a square foot area covered by the roof of about 10,000 feet. Is THAT the only type of home you would allow?

There are also "zombie houses", burned out hulks condemned eye sore blights on neighborhoods housing the less fortunate squatting until removed. Is that the only type of home you would allow?

Providing equal protection before the law says nothing about equal reward paid by other citizens to their peers in exchange for their efforts, talents, time or investment.

The genius of Capitalism is not that it rewards people equally. The genius is that it allows people equal opportunity to gain rewards based on their personal desires and personal efforts.

The government regulates and redistributes the rewards earned. This serves to vent pressure and avoid riots in the streets.

To the extent that the rewards are limited through regulation and taxes and redistributed to help quell rebellion, people are either encouraged or discouraged from expending effort and treasure to prosper.

Your dystopian vision addresses the effort of government to quell rebellion, but ignores the encouragement of the best among us to fulfill their personal visions.

In your visualized dystopia, reward for Elon Musk's genius would be sacrificed in order that he could share the same standard of living as the homeless guy you desire to help.

 

[danielpalos]

You argument is based on a misunderstanding.

"Provide for the general welfare" does not mean to feed the hungry, house the homeless and cloth the naked. That is Christianity, not the Federal Government.

The duty of our government is to allow the free pursuit of happiness, not to guarantee the successful attainment of happiness.

Capitalism is the economic model used within our Republic. It succeeds because it relies on individual reward for individual effort. Simple. Direct. Self sustaining.

Capitalism is regulated to assure that everyone is protected from being compelled to buy the same thing. It is perverted when everyone IS forced to buy the same thing.

At the time of the ratification of the US Constitution, there was no welfare that supported individuals needing temporary or permanent financial support. OBVIOUSLY what you interpret "welfare" to mean is not what the meaning was at the time.

That part of your argument is thereby shown to be obviously empty, baseless and imagined by perverters of the thoughts of the Framers.

You go on. You seem to say that all people be provided with a home regardless of effort, responsibility, desire or request. What if a person specifically desires NO home? In your dystopia, do you imprison that person in a home he doesn't want?

Beyond that, do you assess property taxes on that unwanted home and do you then imprison him in a real prison if he refuses to pay the tax?

In Indianapolis where I live, there are lake shore homes with a square foot area covered by the roof of about 10,000 feet. Is THAT the only type of home you would allow?

There are also "zombie houses", burned out hulks condemned eye sore blights on neighborhoods housing the less fortunate squatting until removed. Is that the only type of home you would allow?

Providing equal protection before the law says nothing about equal reward paid by other citizens to their peers in exchange for their efforts, talents, time or investment.

The genius of Capitalism is not that it rewards people equally. The genius is that it allows people equal opportunity to gain rewards based on their personal desires and personal efforts.

The government regulates and redistributes the rewards earned. This serves to vent pressure and avoid riots in the streets.

To the extent that the rewards are limited through regulation and taxes and redistributed to help quell rebellion, people are either encouraged or discouraged from expending effort and treasure to prosper.

Your dystopian vision addresses the effort of government to quell rebellion, but ignores the encouragement of the best among us to fulfill their personal visions.

In your visualized dystopia, reward for Elon Musk's genius would be sacrificed in order that he could share the same standard of living as the homeless guy you desire to help.

I agree to disagree. Promoting the general welfare may require disbursements to Individuals. The right wing has nothing but appeals to ignorance under our form of Capitalism where corporate welfare is alive and well. Admit it, y'all really just like to "hate on the Poor" under Capitalism.

 

[code1211]

I agree to disagree. Promoting the general welfare may require disbursements to Individuals. The right wing has nothing but appeals to ignorance under our form of Capitalism where corporate welfare is alive and well. Admit it, y'all really just like to "hate on the Poor" under Capitalism.

Your demand for me to admit that which is a lie is ridiculous.

Can you show me the language for the US Constitution that recommends or allows payment sot individuals?

Since this does not exist in the enumerated powers of the Executive or in the rest of the document, then it is specifically prohibited by the Tenth Amendment.

Obviously, the general moves made by all of our lying thieves elected to national office have been made to centralize power away from the people and into Washington DC (District of Communism).

The current set up of our government with power drained away from the people and the various states to a central monolith is EXACTLY what the Framers were trying to prevent.

 

[danielpalos]

Your demand for me to admit that which is a lie is ridiculous.

Can you show me the language for the US Constitution that recommends or allows payment sot individuals?

Since this does not exist in the enumerated powers of the Executive or in the rest of the document, then it is specifically prohibited by the Tenth Amendment.

Obviously, the general moves made by all of our lying thieves elected to national office have been made to centralize power away from the people and into Washington DC (District of Communism).

The current set up of our government with power drained away from the people and the various states to a central monolith is EXACTLY what the Framers were trying to prevent.

lol. Our welfare clause is General not limited by right wing special pleading and right wing implied fantasy. Any more simple questions?

 

[code1211]

lol. Our welfare clause is General not limited by right wing special pleading and right wing implied fantasy. Any more simple questions?

I didn't think so.

Why do you believe that your ignorance is wisdom?

 

[danielpalos]

I didn't think so.

Why do you believe that your ignorance is wisdom?

Because you have no better answers. Our welfare clause is General and must cover payments to individuals.

 

[code1211]

Because you have no better answers. Our welfare clause is General and must cover payments to individuals.

"must cover"?

Why?

Here is some reading you REALLY need to do.

It's pretty short. Shouldn't be too taxing. Incidentally, "taxing" is what the General Welfare Clause actually addresses.

Have fun!

The Context: What Does 'Promote the General Welfare' Mean? - Historyplex

 

[Geoist]

We agree on the fact that the govt is meant to protect the rights of its citizens. Where we part ways is the idea that food, clean water, shelter, education and healthcare are Rights. I don't recognize the UDHR since the constitution is what should direcrt the actions of the US govt. The govt needs to protect me from foreign and domestic invaders and then leave me alone. The rest I can provide for myself or voluntarily enter into mutually beneficial agreements with other citizens to get what I need.

So I assume you do not use public roads?

 

[danielpalos]

"must cover"?

Why?

Here is some reading you REALLY need to do.

It's pretty short. Shouldn't be too taxing. Incidentally, "taxing" is what the General Welfare Clause actually addresses.

Have fun!

The Context: What Does 'Promote the General Welfare' Mean? - Historyplex

I don't take any of you seriously about individual payments and the general welfare. Because, if there are no payments to individuals for a general power there must be even less excuse for individual payments with a common defense clause.

 

[code1211]

I don't take any of you seriously about individual payments and the general welfare. Because, if there are no payments to individuals for a general power there must be even less excuse for individual payments with a common defense clause.

Logic in your response is absent.

 

[danielpalos]

Logic in your response is absent.

lol. Projection is what right wingers are best at. You have no logic.

 

[code1211]

lol. Projection is what right wingers are best at. You have no logic.

Since I continue to try to converse with you, I agree.

 

[bomberfox]

Limits to government except for the military and cops, curious only social programs have the ire of the GOP

 

[Razoo]

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction."

Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations

Excellent

 

[Razoo]

It's just an approach that works better. If you hit hard times, you will find other citizens are often not that interested in you or your family.

Humane societies don't let 4-year-olds die of hunger or disease just because their parents hit hard times. Charity or "other citizens" have never really helped them enough. You need more formal systems to provide basic social safety nets.

Governments which provide such basic human rights safety nets tend to do much better- both in terms of being more humane, and, suprisingly, in terms of economic growth for everyone.

Thailand is the latest country to adapt a system of universal healthcare for its citizens. It has been a dramatic success. It still has a private medical system, which caters to the wealthy in the country and is a major destination for medical tourism from around the world, including the United States. But with the passage of UHC, its public health has improved dramatically. But what's interesting is that its economy has picked up steam and the extreme poverty rate in the country has been eliminated. How? It turns out that the biggest cause for extreme poverty was unanticipated catastrophic illness in an uninsured person. Entire families were going broke and falling into poverty trying to pay for the medical care of a loved one- with kids dropping out of school to go to work to help, and so never getting an education, etc... Once that burden was lifted off the shoulders of families, the economy improved dramatically.

Thailand gave healthcare to its entire population and the results were dramatic | World Economic Forum.

The USA is the only developed nation in the world that does not provide healthcare ....... in reality Single Payer Insurance would be funded by the users not the government.