We Have a Spending Problem

[jonny5]

There is no power to raise money for the general warfare.

There is no such thing as general warfare. Perhaps you mean the common defense, war, punishments of offenses against the law of nations, raising and supporting armies, providing and maintaining a navy, protecting the states against invasion. All powers specifically enumerated.

 

[MTAtech]

There is no such thing as general warfare. Perhaps you mean the common defense, war, punishments of offenses against the law of nations, raising and supporting armies, providing and maintaining a navy, protecting the states against invasion. All powers specifically enumerated.

That train has left the station many decades ago. Arguing that items such as Social Security and Medicaid are not just a bad ideas, but unconstitutional, is a quixotic argument that has been long decided by courts.

 

[James972]

That train has left the station many decades ago. Arguing that items such as Social Security and Medicaid are not just a bad ideas, but unconstitutional, is a quixotic argument that has been long decided by courts.

but never courts with enough people like Thomas Gorsuch Roberts Aleito and the opportunity may be at hand.

 

[MTAtech]

but never courts with enough people like Thomas Gorsuch Roberts Aleito and the opportunity may be at hand.

Go ahead and tilt at windmills. These programs are established law and established in the hearts of Americans.

 

[James972]

Go ahead and tilt at windmills. These programs are established law and established in the hearts of Americans.

most Americans are still not communists and would love the opportunity to be free. That is why the liberal programs must be enforced at gunpoint. Give Americans a choice and see what they do without a liberal gun to their heads.

 

[MTAtech]

most Americans are still not communists and would love the opportunity to be free. That is why the liberal programs must be enforced at gunpoint. Give Americans a choice and see what they do without a liberal gun to their heads.

Meanwhile these liberal programs that help lots of Americans, are popular.

 

[James972]

Meanwhile these liberal programs that help lots of Americans, are popular.

how does forcing people to pay 5 times what they should pay help people rather than impoverish them?? I"m sure the soviet leaders thought that too when people were starving to death!!

 

[MTAtech]

how does forcing people to pay 5 times what they should pay help people rather than impoverish them?? I"m sure the soviet leaders thought that too when people were starving to death!!

I don't know specifically what you are writing about, because your post doesn't elaborate but prior to Social Security, seniors died in poverty. Prior to Medicare, seniors were denied medical insurance because they're a poor bet for insurance companies. Social programs are popular because they work and help people. You don't like them because they undercut your ideology that teaches that government can do no good.

 

[danielpalos]

where is this enumerated power found???

Infrastructure promotes the general welfare.

 

[James972]

Infrastructure promotes the general welfare.

too bad its left to states and not in enumerated powers/general welfare clause of federal Constitution

 

[jonny5]

That train has left the station many decades ago. Arguing that items such as Social Security and Medicaid are not just a bad ideas, but unconstitutional, is a quixotic argument that has been long decided by courts.

And yet, this is a debate forum.

 

[jonny5]

I don't know specifically what you are writing about, because your post doesn't elaborate but prior to Social Security, seniors died in poverty. Prior to Medicare, seniors were denied medical insurance because they're a poor bet for insurance companies. Social programs are popular because they work and help people. You don't like them because they undercut your ideology that teaches that government can do no good.

Not no good. More harm than good. Indeed, social programs are popular with a lot of people because they generally arent paying for them.

 

[jonny5]

Meanwhile these liberal programs that help lots of Americans, are popular.

Not quite 3/4 of the states, there. You think they would be ratified once we had a debate on it?

 

[MTAtech]

Not quite 3/4 of the states, there. You think they would be ratified once we had a debate on it?

Thinking that Social Security and Medicare require a constitutional amendment, while they have already existed for 83 and 52 years, respectively, is not only laughable but merely a brain-dead, reactionary, wet dream, fantasy. These programs aren't going to be suddenly overturned by courts after decades of being sustained.

It's ridiculous to even discuss the concept.

 

[danielpalos]

Thinking that Social Security and Medicare require a constitutional amendment, while they have already existed for 83 and 52 years, respectively, is not only laughable but merely a brain-dead, reactionary, wet dream, fantasy. These programs aren't going to be suddenly overturned by courts after decades of being sustained.

It's ridiculous to even discuss the concept.

The right wing prefers to increase defense spending and reduce welfare spending. They don't think it is an, economic problem.

 

[Critter7r]

yes and he's not a conservative. Make sense?

No it doesn't, since conservatives put him in office.

 

[Critter7r]

And yet, 3/4 of public infrastructure spending comes from local govts. And private spending far outspends public. Telecom corporations alone spend over 100bn a year on communications infrastructure. Rail companies have spent over 600bn in the last 30 years on the rail network.

Those numbers are intertwined and conflated all over the place. Not *your* numbers specifically, but the numbers in the categories of "local spending", "federal spending", "private spending" ...

For example, you mention that the rail companies spent $600B in the last 30 years ... local municipalities pay the RR companies monthly fees for the maintenance of RR Crossings. The RR company contracts out the work and pays the bill, but is collecting monthly payments from local municipalities. We pay something like $14,000 annually for the RR company to maintain the 10 crossings in my little town.

And a lot of local muni's funding for infrastructure is allocated to them from the state and federal government. So public infrastructure may be funded locally, but a lot of that money comes from the state and feds. And I know in my muni, we get more than half of our road and underground utility (water & sewer) funding from state and federal revenue sharing.

 

[jonny5]

Those numbers are intertwined and conflated all over the place. Not *your* numbers specifically, but the numbers in the categories of "local spending", "federal spending", "private spending" ...

For example, you mention that the rail companies spent $600B in the last 30 years ... local municipalities pay the RR companies monthly fees for the maintenance of RR Crossings. The RR company contracts out the work and pays the bill, but is collecting monthly payments from local municipalities. We pay something like $14,000 annually for the RR company to maintain the 10 crossings in my little town.

And a lot of local muni's funding for infrastructure is allocated to them from the state and federal government. So public infrastructure may be funded locally, but a lot of that money comes from the state and feds. And I know in my muni, we get more than half of our road and underground utility (water & sewer) funding from state and federal revenue sharing.

Its still pretty accurate. Corporations have an interest in infrastructure that supports their shareholder profit. Such that they spend more than the govt on creating and maintaing it. The govt didnt built 99% of the telecom cables, switches, and servers, towers and software that make up the internet. Corporations did.

We neither empowered govt to spend on infrastructure, nor do we need to.

 

[jonny5]

Thinking that Social Security and Medicare require a constitutional amendment, while they have already existed for 83 and 52 years, respectively, is not only laughable but merely a brain-dead, reactionary, wet dream, fantasy. These programs aren't going to be suddenly overturned by courts after decades of being sustained.

It's ridiculous to even discuss the concept.

And yet, this is a debate forum. Perhaps youd be more comfortable in a comment section somewhere if you dont want to discuss anything.

 

[danielpalos]

Its still pretty accurate. Corporations have an interest in infrastructure that supports their shareholder profit. Such that they spend more than the govt on creating and maintaing it. The govt didnt built 99% of the telecom cables, switches, and servers, towers and software that make up the internet. Corporations did.

We neither empowered govt to spend on infrastructure, nor do we need to.

Have any links? In any case, Government has to serve the Public interest not the Private interest.

 

[James972]

Government has to serve the Public interest not the Private interest.

and the public interest is private corporations since they invented the stuff that got us from the stone age to here and provide the jobs that enable us to buy the stuff.

 

[James972]

No it doesn't, since conservatives put him[Trump] in office.

if so not conservatives who wanted a balanced budget. Almost nothing was said about it. Do you understand?

 

[danielpalos]

and the public interest is private corporations since they invented the stuff that got us from the stone age to here and provide the jobs that enable us to buy the stuff.

How do you figure? Government took us to the Moon and back, last millennium. The private sector still needs a profit motive.

 

[James972]

Government took us to the Moon.

private enterprise took us to moon but not talking about moon but rather 1000's of other things that average people buy from Godly corporations to sustain their standard of living at ever higher levels

 

[danielpalos]

private enterprise took us to moon but not talking about moon but rather 1000's of other things that average people buy from Godly corporations to sustain their standard of living at ever higher levels

It was done via command economics. There is still no private profit motive for the private sector to go to the moon.