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.
Providing for the general welfare is a general power delegated to our federal Congress.There is no provision for excuses in the federal doctrine. Our welfare clause is General, not common.lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.Once again you still can’t back up your point. Promote the general welfare does not mean provide for.
So let’s move on, admit you don’t have a clue, if you have nothing else. What else do you got that I can so easily shoot down?
There is no authority to promote the general warfare or the common defense.
Actually liberals don’t take the Constitution seriously, which is why you can’t show us where it’s the role of the Federal Government to provide for those who choose not to provide for themselves through welfare. The Constitution DOES clearly state the role and responsibilities of the Federal Government, which includes funding for the common defense (military). It goes on to say, as be shown through the X Amendment, those responsibilities not delegated to the Federal Government become the responsibility of the respected states ... after that it becomes the responsibility of the people.
It’s in clear black and white for those who are literate with the ability and common sense to at least read it. At least ONE of us has the ability to back up our point, it’s just not you.
There are clear guidelines to the roles and responsibility of the Federal Government, the State, and the people under the Constitution. You provided (1) no evidence through Constitutional Amendment (2) nor Constitutional Clause staying the contrary. I am the only one who has provided specific sections found under the United States Constitution that CLEARLY backs what I’ve been saying.
The fact you can’t provide one article, not one, in the Constitution that supports the notion that “provision of welfare is the responsibility of the Federal Government”,... which is not surprising at all to say the least.
Show us how “knowledgeable” you THINK you are, bu posting actual Constitutional evidence that supports your view, instead of wasting my time with your “unsupported” opinions. I follow supported evidence, not your gibberish.
too bad for you, the preamble is our mission statement. the delegated powers are in Article 1, Section 8.Both terms Promote and Provide are used in reference to the general welfare.Promoting the general welfare means coming up with solutions to simple poverty and not excuses.I understand what it said, I am waiting for to show us where in the Constitution, not the preamble where it specifically states that people that are lazy should be supported by hard working taxpayers. Also, if this was the intent of the forefathers was to pay the lazy for not working, why didn’t they create a law during the first meeting of Congress?
Providing welfare was not established until 1935 under President Roosevelt, it is not quoted as being the desire of our Founders when they used the language “promote the general welfare”..
If that’s what you believe, provide some evidence of it.
Actually no. That particular section of the preamble reads: “ provide for the common defense, (comma) .... promote the general welfare, (comma). Now let’s look at the sentence “structure”. That particular wording pertains to two different subject matters, each one separated through the use of a comma.
Provide for the common defense
Promote the general welfare
“Provide and promote the general welfare” is what, I believe, you HOPE to find.
So it would appear that you failed in English class, as well as your knowledge of the United States Constitution. What’s next?
they could make more if they get a job. i am advocating for unemployment compensation at one dollar an hour equivalent less, than the minimum wage.You don't understand Capitalism. Capitalism is about Voluntary transactions. Employment is at the will of either party. It is not about using Capitalism to "punish". It is about promoting the general welfare by merely using Capitalism for All of its worth in modern times.You keep missing the point with your special pleading in a vacuum. Capitalism cannot employ Everyone because it is not that efficient. There must be structural unemployment to create potentially new products at potentially lower prices.Seems to me you are full of excuses and short on details and nothing is going to happen because the lazy are too lazy to work for money.
Capitalism is about voluntary transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Requiring a work ethic is socialism.
It has been doing great until the last few years when people are just wanting money without actually having to work for it, then trying to claim that sitting and doing nothing is beneficial for society.
You are right, I don't buy into your idea, mainly because your idea rewards the lazy and takes away from the hard working Americans. Your idea of the unemployed creating new products would be fine as long as they can payback their debt to the American taxpayer at that time.
The point is, right wingers; that not all capital opportunities can always be taken advantage of at any given time. Some people may be better off taking classes or vocational training while on unemployment. Reducing commuter traffic could also be a plus.
You are clear as mud on what you are saying. I already said that we need safety nets for individuals that find themselves out of work or that maybe getting welfare and trying to improve their lot in life. So, you are not communicating your message which sounds like everyone should be entitled to $14 forever, whether they work or not.
it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.Why do the working people have to pay for people that decide that they should not work? They are a burden to the state and to the taxpayer and provide no benefit to society.
So far there has been no attempt by daniel to provide what the lazy person can positively give to society, all he has concentrated is on the drain to society they cause.
Let's see your proof.
Employment relationships are governed by State laws.it is about equal protection of the law. the law is employment at the will of either party. are the Poor, not Worth it under our form of Capitalism?You keep missing the point with your special pleading in a vacuum. Capitalism cannot employ Everyone because it is not that efficient. There must be structural unemployment to create potentially new products at potentially lower prices.
Capitalism is about voluntary transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Requiring a work ethic is socialism.
If you're not working and thus not generating an income, what do you have that benefits the other guy? Have you tried paying for your pot with pocket lint?
And you clearly have no concept of what words mean.
Employment is not a law, it is an agreement of two parties.
Then prove there is no equal protection.
Employment is at the will of either party. Only the Poor are denied and disparaged.Employment relationships are governed by State laws.it is about equal protection of the law. the law is employment at the will of either party. are the Poor, not Worth it under our form of Capitalism?You keep missing the point with your special pleading in a vacuum. Capitalism cannot employ Everyone because it is not that efficient. There must be structural unemployment to create potentially new products at potentially lower prices.
Capitalism is about voluntary transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Requiring a work ethic is socialism.
If you're not working and thus not generating an income, what do you have that benefits the other guy? Have you tried paying for your pot with pocket lint?
And you clearly have no concept of what words mean.
Employment is not a law, it is an agreement of two parties.
Then prove there is no equal protection.
Means testing is not cheap.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.Why do the working people have to pay for people that decide that they should not work? They are a burden to the state and to the taxpayer and provide no benefit to society.
So far there has been no attempt by daniel to provide what the lazy person can positively give to society, all he has concentrated is on the drain to society they cause.
Let's see your proof.
Again, I want to see proof of your claim, do you have it or not? I also asked what the natural rate unemployment was under capitalism and have yet seen an answer to that either.
Do you have proof to back up your claims or not?
That is the general power that covers this topic. It is a general power not a common power.Providing for the general welfare is a general power delegated to our federal Congress.There is no provision for excuses in the federal doctrine. Our welfare clause is General, not common.lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.
There is no authority to promote the general warfare or the common defense.
Actually liberals don’t take the Constitution seriously, which is why you can’t show us where it’s the role of the Federal Government to provide for those who choose not to provide for themselves through welfare. The Constitution DOES clearly state the role and responsibilities of the Federal Government, which includes funding for the common defense (military). It goes on to say, as be shown through the X Amendment, those responsibilities not delegated to the Federal Government become the responsibility of the respected states ... after that it becomes the responsibility of the people.
It’s in clear black and white for those who are literate with the ability and common sense to at least read it. At least ONE of us has the ability to back up our point, it’s just not you.
There are clear guidelines to the roles and responsibility of the Federal Government, the State, and the people under the Constitution. You provided (1) no evidence through Constitutional Amendment (2) nor Constitutional Clause staying the contrary. I am the only one who has provided specific sections found under the United States Constitution that CLEARLY backs what I’ve been saying.
The fact you can’t provide one article, not one, in the Constitution that supports the notion that “provision of welfare is the responsibility of the Federal Government”,... which is not surprising at all to say the least.
Show us how “knowledgeable” you THINK you are, bu posting actual Constitutional evidence that supports your view, instead of wasting my time with your “unsupported” opinions. I follow supported evidence, not your gibberish.
Like I said ... (1) show me evidence, written in the Constitution, that providing general welfare is the actual role and responsibility that’s been delegated under the branch of the Federal Government or (2) quit wasting my time.
Until you do you have absolutely nothing that backs your argument.
Employment is at the will of either party. Only the Poor are denied and disparaged.Employment relationships are governed by State laws.it is about equal protection of the law. the law is employment at the will of either party. are the Poor, not Worth it under our form of Capitalism?If you're not working and thus not generating an income, what do you have that benefits the other guy? Have you tried paying for your pot with pocket lint?
And you clearly have no concept of what words mean.
Employment is not a law, it is an agreement of two parties.
Then prove there is no equal protection.
i already read it. You don't know what you are talking about. You have no "gospel Truth" for simply being on the right wing.too bad for you, the preamble is our mission statement. the delegated powers are in Article 1, Section 8.Both terms Promote and Provide are used in reference to the general welfare.Promoting the general welfare means coming up with solutions to simple poverty and not excuses.
Providing welfare was not established until 1935 under President Roosevelt, it is not quoted as being the desire of our Founders when they used the language “promote the general welfare”..
If that’s what you believe, provide some evidence of it.
Actually no. That particular section of the preamble reads: “ provide for the common defense, (comma) .... promote the general welfare, (comma). Now let’s look at the sentence “structure”. That particular wording pertains to two different subject matters, each one separated through the use of a comma.
Provide for the common defense
Promote the general welfare
“Provide and promote the general welfare” is what, I believe, you HOPE to find.
So it would appear that you failed in English class, as well as your knowledge of the United States Constitution. What’s next?
Too bad for you you just tried to use the preamble as your reference, to say the Federal Government does both promote and provide general welfare. You can sound like an idiot all you want, if you choose.
Again, (1) take the time to actually READ the Constitution, (2) come back with an actual Article and Section where it’s written the role of the Federal Government is to provide welfare.
Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.they could make more if they get a job. i am advocating for unemployment compensation at one dollar an hour equivalent less, than the minimum wage.You don't understand Capitalism. Capitalism is about Voluntary transactions. Employment is at the will of either party. It is not about using Capitalism to "punish". It is about promoting the general welfare by merely using Capitalism for All of its worth in modern times.You keep missing the point with your special pleading in a vacuum. Capitalism cannot employ Everyone because it is not that efficient. There must be structural unemployment to create potentially new products at potentially lower prices.
Capitalism is about voluntary transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Requiring a work ethic is socialism.
It has been doing great until the last few years when people are just wanting money without actually having to work for it, then trying to claim that sitting and doing nothing is beneficial for society.
You are right, I don't buy into your idea, mainly because your idea rewards the lazy and takes away from the hard working Americans. Your idea of the unemployed creating new products would be fine as long as they can payback their debt to the American taxpayer at that time.
The point is, right wingers; that not all capital opportunities can always be taken advantage of at any given time. Some people may be better off taking classes or vocational training while on unemployment. Reducing commuter traffic could also be a plus.
You are clear as mud on what you are saying. I already said that we need safety nets for individuals that find themselves out of work or that maybe getting welfare and trying to improve their lot in life. So, you are not communicating your message which sounds like everyone should be entitled to $14 forever, whether they work or not.
Stop calling it UE, because it's not.
be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.Why do the working people have to pay for people that decide that they should not work? They are a burden to the state and to the taxpayer and provide no benefit to society.
So far there has been no attempt by daniel to provide what the lazy person can positively give to society, all he has concentrated is on the drain to society they cause.
Let's see your proof.
Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.
Means testing is not cheap.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.Why do the working people have to pay for people that decide that they should not work? They are a burden to the state and to the taxpayer and provide no benefit to society.
So far there has been no attempt by daniel to provide what the lazy person can positively give to society, all he has concentrated is on the drain to society they cause.
Let's see your proof.
Again, I want to see proof of your claim, do you have it or not? I also asked what the natural rate unemployment was under capitalism and have yet seen an answer to that either.
Do you have proof to back up your claims or not?
Unemployment compensation should be automatic.
cheaper than welfare; and, if you don't want to pay more in taxes, employ more people to lower your tax burden.Employment relationships are governed by State laws.it is about equal protection of the law. the law is employment at the will of either party. are the Poor, not Worth it under our form of Capitalism?If you're not working and thus not generating an income, what do you have that benefits the other guy? Have you tried paying for your pot with pocket lint?
And you clearly have no concept of what words mean.
Employment is not a law, it is an agreement of two parties.
Then prove there is no equal protection.
He thinks it's not equal if you get the unemployment compensation your employer has been paying for and you got laid off, but he doesn't because he never held a job.
be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.Why do the working people have to pay for people that decide that they should not work? They are a burden to the state and to the taxpayer and provide no benefit to society.
So far there has been no attempt by daniel to provide what the lazy person can positively give to society, all he has concentrated is on the drain to society they cause.
Let's see your proof.
Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.
Only the clueless and Causeless claim that. Anyone who knows any Thing about economics knows solving for simple poverty must engender a positive multiplier effect upon an economy. And, compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment functions as an Automatic stabilizer upon our economy.Means testing is not cheap.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.
Let's see your proof.
Again, I want to see proof of your claim, do you have it or not? I also asked what the natural rate unemployment was under capitalism and have yet seen an answer to that either.
Do you have proof to back up your claims or not?
Unemployment compensation should be automatic.
Again, I asked two questions and you answer neither, so you really aren’t serious you are just regurgitating the same BS over and over. For a guy that claims he has a cause, you sure have no answers.
The issue is the hard working taxpayer is denied equal protection as they have to work and pay the lazy man that does not work.
cheaper than welfare; and, if you don't want to pay more in taxes, employ more people to lower your tax burden.Employment relationships are governed by State laws.it is about equal protection of the law. the law is employment at the will of either party. are the Poor, not Worth it under our form of Capitalism?
Employment is not a law, it is an agreement of two parties.
Then prove there is no equal protection.
He thinks it's not equal if you get the unemployment compensation your employer has been paying for and you got laid off, but he doesn't because he never held a job.
it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.because, dear; it is more cost effective than means tested welfare.
Let's see your proof.
Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.
Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.
