Just out of Curiousity

[Darkwind]

um the quote I quoted of yours mentions obama, you should have read it.
and I could be wrong but section 8 of I believe article one or two gives you your answer on the US be involved in gaining revenue which would be competing with any private business.

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;"

Your right. I was actually being facetious, but I did mention it first.


You are actually going to use the general welfare clause as authority? And I though you might have been someone who was serious about discussing this.

The General welfare clause is not a catch all clause which gives the government the right to do anything they wish. Tell Me you understand that?

lawyers can take a lot of constitution, they could also say providing for the general welfare of the people could mean competing with private business. How do you think they legalized abortion through due process and right to privacy.

The government does not provide for the general welfare. They promote it by allowing the people to flourish in an environment free of government restrictions.

I'm also aware that lawyers can twist anything to suit their needs. After all, receive training in it.

 

[Darkwind]

Oh, one other thing before I get out of here.

I also don't believe that the government has the right to own land. At best, they should be permitted to lease land for the official use of government business.

 

[veritas]

Oh, one other thing before I get out of here.

I also don't believe that the government has the right to own land. At best, they should be permitted to lease land for the official use of government business.

You're crazy.

 

[Luissa]

Oh, one other thing before I get out of here.

I also don't believe that the government has the right to own land. At best, they should be permitted to lease land for the official use of government business.

you do realize that BLM land in wyomning is cheaper to lease then privately owned land and is probably the same in other states.

 

[Luissa]

and if the federal government didn't own land, you wouldn't have the national park system. There goes that revenue.
YOur idea is to pretty much to bankrupt the US even more then it already is. Next time you are driving on the interstate thing about that.

 

[lawbuff]

Your right. I was actually being facetious, but I did mention it first.


You are actually going to use the general welfare clause as authority? And I though you might have been someone who was serious about discussing this.

The General welfare clause is not a catch all clause which gives the government the right to do anything they wish. Tell Me you understand that?

There are "enumerated" powers, specifically under section 8, and "inherent/implied" powers. The GW clause would seem to fall under such.

My law dictionary cites under; Inherent Constitutional powers: The federal government possesses "all those inherent and implied powers which, at the time of adopting the constitution, were generally considered to belong to every government as such, and as being essential to the exercise of it's functions, 12 WALL. 447, 556.

Wallace was one of the SC reporters, such as Cranch and Peters It alligns with the US reporter, 79, from 1870.

I would have to pay a visit to the law library to read the case.

I do agree with your premise though, the federal government is way too big, that is why we are 12 trillion in debt.

 

[paperview]

Of those who supposedly 'need' help, almost a full 3% of them are young and don't want to spend the money on insurance because they are...well, young and the others are rich enough not to need insurance. A simple deduction into a HSA (much like Social Security) for those who cannot afford health insurance because they are young and just starting out in their careers is a better solution

I don't understand how people can make the statement "rich enough not to need insurance." If you are rich enough to not need insurance, then you too stupid to be rich.

No one with any spit of a brain who has the money, would go completely without insurance. ONE stroke, one bad fall, one nasty infection or malady can put someone back literally hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions. Anyone who forgoes even High Deductible Health Insurance and who has not considered the cost/benefit ratio is, like I said: too stupid to be rich.

As far as your other comment, on HSA's and the young. You can't have an HSA without HD Health Insurance. It's a must. So your comment implies to me, you really don't understand the subject very much.