Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wrong answer. There is no legitimate legislative or spending power for such things in the US Constitution.If the small business can’t afford this and their business would flop, then the government can provide it instead
So we’re going to cut legitimate (if bloated) spending for illegal and unconstitutional purposes?As far as the government spending would go in this situation, we could easily cut some defense spending
That’s just a matter of simple legislative action that could be done at any time.and make sure corporations pay the OFFICIAL tax rate and not the EFFECTIVE tax rate
There isn’t a need (or legitimate mandate) for that spending NOW.there would be no use for TANF and SNAP for able bodied individuals
You think some single mothers can afford to feed their kids without SNAP? No way. I know your immediate reaction to this will be “well she shouldn’t have had the kids”. I’ll save you the trouble on saying that and just respond to it. You’re right. She shouldn’t have had the kid. It was her responsibility to make sure she could afford the kid to begin with. Here’s the thing though: the kids still…exists. They exist either way right? Should we let them starve because the mom was irresponsible? Probably not right? And no adoption is a horrible idea because that many kids do NOT get adopted. That means there would be a serious drain on the foster system that would be much more expensive than SNAP. Plus, it’s better for the kids psychologically for them to stay with their mothers who are still willing to raise them.Wrong answer. There is no legitimate legislative or spending power for such things in the US Constitution.
So we’re going to cut legitimate (if bloated) spending for illegal and unconstitutional purposes?
That’s just a matter of simple legislative action that could be done at any time.
There isn’t a need (or legitimate mandate) for that spending NOW.
The fact that none of these things can be directly traced to one of the specific powers enumerated it Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution. Not the opening clause of the Section, the enumerated powers listed afterwards.Also, about all this being unconstitutional. What in the constitution forbids this?
It’s not our problem if they starve. Personally I’m in favor of forcing the father to pay all costs to support both mother and child until the child’s 18th birthday; but that will never happen.They exist either way right? Should we let them starve because the mom was irresponsible?
and make sure corporations pay the OFFICIAL tax rate and not the EFFECTIVE tax rate like they have been doing.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds to me like you want other people to give you more of their hard-earned money, directly or indirectly.Republicans are under the delusion that all far lefties want to get rid of capitalism altogether. While some misguided liberals do express this, for the most part that isn’t what we want. I mean this sure as hell is not what democrats in office want - not even close.
There’s no denying that capitalism is essential for any nation’s economy to be successful. A private market itself is important. Hell most nations know this anyway. I mean contrary to popular belief, Venezuela has a private market. The government is simply incompetent so that’s why it is a failed state.
To me, capitalism in America in the 50’s is the dream. Capitalism now in America? It’s a complete joke. Unfettered capitalism sounds good on paper, but it simply isn’t in practice.
Let me sum up how corporations today view labor:
“Okay so how much can we pay our employees to at least keep them productive and keep a steady flow of applicants? Turnover isn’t a big deal so long as new people come in a steady flow. Obviously we aren’t concerned about paying them a wage they can live off of. We just meed to maximize profit.”
This is where the government needs to step in.
about paying them a wage they can live off of. We just meed to maximize profit.”
This is where the government needs to step in.
Mandate that schools teach the kids basic economics, mainly that they can't borrow, or loaf, their way to prosperity.
Because most of them aren’t. Derp!Why do you feel they aren't already paying the official tax rate?
See you’re going to have to be more specific. Which powers? As far as I can tell, there is nothing relevant to what we are talking about by reading it. I think you know that which is why you didn’t single it out. What’s interesting about this article, ironic to your point, is that the government has some clear cut power over private institutions lol.The fact that none of these things can be directly traced to one of the specific powers enumerated it Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution. Not the opening clause of the Section, the enumerated powers listed afterwards.
It’s not our problem if they starve. Personally I’m in favor of forcing the father to pay all costs to support both mother and child until the child’s 18th birthday; but that will never happen.
Oh right like it would be realistic for K-12 to teach the nuances of economic theory. I guess your idea of it would be “capitalism: good! Socialism bad! Derp!” Why bother explaining why. The kid wouldn’t need to know why. Fox News says so!The OP is a vivid example of the tragic consequences of the failure of schools to teach basic economics.
This is where the government needs to step in.
Republicans are under the delusion that all far lefties want to get rid of capitalism altogether. While some misguided liberals do express this, for the most part that isn’t what we want. I mean this sure as hell is not what democrats in office want - not even close.
There’s no denying that capitalism is essential for any nation’s economy to be successful. A private market itself is important. Hell most nations know this anyway. I mean contrary to popular belief, Venezuela has a private market. The government is simply incompetent so that’s why it is a failed state.
To me, capitalism in America in the 50’s is the dream. Capitalism now in America? It’s a complete joke. Unfettered capitalism sounds good on paper, but it simply isn’t in practice.
Let me sum up how corporations today view labor:
“Okay so how much can we pay our employees to at least keep them productive and keep a steady flow of applicants? Turnover isn’t a big deal so long as new people come in a steady flow. Obviously we aren’t concerned about paying them a wage they can live off of. We just meed to maximize profit.”
This is where the government needs to step in.
Because most of them aren’t. Derp!
Well, in part, we can blame corporate lobbyists for this. After all, they make sure they get tax breaks which of course only makes the deficit worse.They do a great job don't they?!?
National Debt Clock: What Is the National Debt Right Now? - The …
Because they don’t you moron. They don’t actually pay 21%. When law changes the corporate tax rate, it only goes after the OFFICIAL rate. That doesnt mean it goes after loopholes and deductions that allows them to pay much less EFFECTIVELY.Every corporation pays 21% on their profit.
Explain how their effective rate means they pay less.
Specifically, what is the average household income where one of the workers is earning minimum wage? You have no clue, do you?Raising the minimum wage. Give workers stake in profits to some extent. Make unions stronger. Work towards guaranteeing good benefits for any full time workers.
Corporate profits are at an all time high by the way. Many corporations can afford these reforms on a long enough timeframe of implementation.
Well, in part, we can blame corporate lobbyists for this. After all, they make sure they get tax breaks which of course only makes the deficit worse.
The US has a mixed economy, I’m aware. We still have capitalism and it’s becoming more and more unregulated. Corporations are thriving while workers suffer.
Uh yeah, they do. They influence members of congress to do their bidding. You want to blame congress? Be my guest. Just don’t pretend corporate lobbyists don’t play a major role because obviously they do.Who controls the tax code/laws? Corporate lobbyist?!?
Yep, I am obviously correct. Corporate profits are at an all time high.
So what you want is fascismRepublicans are under the delusion that all far lefties want to get rid of capitalism altogether. While some misguided liberals do express this, for the most part that isn’t what we want. I mean this sure as hell is not what democrats in office want - not even close.
There’s no denying that capitalism is essential for any nation’s economy to be successful. A private market itself is important. Hell most nations know this anyway. I mean contrary to popular belief, Venezuela has a private market. The government is simply incompetent so that’s why it is a failed state.
To me, capitalism in America in the 50’s is the dream. Capitalism now in America? It’s a complete joke. Unfettered capitalism sounds good on paper, but it simply isn’t in practice.
Let me sum up how corporations today view labor:
“Okay so how much can we pay our employees to at least keep them productive and keep a steady flow of applicants? Turnover isn’t a big deal so long as new people come in a steady flow. Obviously we aren’t concerned about paying them a wage they can live off of. We just meed to maximize profit.”
This is where the government needs to step in.
