What is our obligation to the poor?

[danielpalos]

are you on the right, or just engaging in satire?

it is about morals and bearing True Witness to our own laws, simply for the sake of social morals, "for free" or on a not for profit basis.

Is it moral to force someone to give up their wealth to help another someone else deems needs the help?

Yes, promoting and providing for the general welfare is in our social Contract and federal Constitution.

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

 

[danielpalos]

No dear; it is about morals and bearing True Witness to our own laws, simply for the sake of social morals, "for free" or on a not for profit basis.

Morals? What morals?

are you on the right, or just engaging in satire?

it is about morals and bearing True Witness to our own laws, simply for the sake of social morals, "for free" or on a not for profit basis.

Is it moral to force someone to give up their wealth to help another someone else deems needs the help?

Yes, promoting and providing for the general welfare is in our social Contract and federal Constitution.

Was Robin Hood just in stealing from the rich and giving it to the poor?

Was the Sheriff, just stealing from the poor to give to the rich, and getting paid a crony capital wage for it?

 

[danielpalos]

No dear; it is about morals and bearing True Witness to our own laws, simply for the sake of social morals, "for free" or on a not for profit basis.

If you had morals you would collect food and volunteer at your local food bank instead of whining that other people are too wealthy and need to be taxed more.

Whining doesn't feed anyone.

i am not whining about anything; but looking for solutions to our problems.

Go offer your services to an organization that feeds or houses the poor.

that is your subjective value of morals. i prefer to advocate for equal protection of the law regarding employment at will, for unemployment compensation purposes.

It is there subjective morals? Isn't what you are selling subjective as well? What makes your subjective morality better than someone elses?

It is only your special pleading that tries to "equalize" the argument as being the same. The point is about equal protection of the law.

 

[ding]

Is it moral to force someone to give up their wealth to help another someone else deems needs the help?

Yes, promoting and providing for the general welfare is in our social Contract and federal Constitution.

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, promoting and providing for the general welfare is in our social Contract and federal Constitution.

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

 

[ding]

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

No. it goes to your argument of public welfare. I think we both know your answer too. Beliefs not worth saying are beliefs not worth having, comrade.

 

[ding]

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

Would you like the government to regulate profits as part of the social contract for the general welfare of the people?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, promoting and providing for the general welfare is in our social Contract and federal Constitution.

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic.

Anything more than that is just right wing fantasy?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

No. it goes to your argument of public welfare. I think we both know your answer too. Beliefs not worth saying are beliefs not worth having, comrade.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution. Any more diversions?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

Would you like the government to regulate profits as part of the social contract for the general welfare of the people?

Only if we have real times of war and not fake times of war and therefore, optional times of war as indicated by the necessity of real times of war tax rates.

In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

 

[ding]

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

Would you like the government to regulate profits as part of the social contract for the general welfare of the people?

Only if we have real times of war and not fake times of war and therefore, optional times of war as indicated by the necessity of real times of war tax rates.

In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

How about prices? Should the government regulate prices to promote the general welfare of the people to fulfill the social contract?

 

[ding]

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

No. it goes to your argument of public welfare. I think we both know your answer too. Beliefs not worth saying are beliefs not worth having, comrade.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution. Any more diversions?

The issue is what that means. That's what we are discussing now. Should the government redistribute wealth to promote the general welfare of the people?

 

[ding]

No. it's not. Sorry.

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic.

Anything more than that is just right wing fantasy?

You still didn't answer that question.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

Should the government redistribute wealth to promote the general welfare of the people?

managing a sound economy is the gov'ts obligation to the public, all economic modelling to be successful must achieve full employment.

 

[ding]

.

Should the government redistribute wealth to promote the general welfare of the people?

managing a sound economy is the gov'ts obligation to the public, all economic modelling to be successful must achieve full employment.

So the government should provide jobs for everyone. Got it. How many cars should the government provide?

 

[danielpalos]

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

Would you like the government to regulate profits as part of the social contract for the general welfare of the people?

Only if we have real times of war and not fake times of war and therefore, optional times of war as indicated by the necessity of real times of war tax rates.

In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

How about prices? Should the government regulate prices to promote the general welfare of the people to fulfill the social contract?

Regulating prices is a function delegated to our federal Congress. Subsidies for agriculture and intellectual property don't seem to be bad.

 

[danielpalos]

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

No. it goes to your argument of public welfare. I think we both know your answer too. Beliefs not worth saying are beliefs not worth having, comrade.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution. Any more diversions?

The issue is what that means. That's what we are discussing now. Should the government redistribute wealth to promote the general welfare of the people?

Income redistribution is what it means. Pareto Optimality should be the goal.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it is; sorry.

Do you want government to set wages?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic.

Anything more than that is just right wing fantasy?

You still didn't answer that question.

Only if we need the surety of socialism to bailout capitalism, like during real and not fake, times of war.

 

[danielpalos]

.

Should the government redistribute wealth to promote the general welfare of the people?

managing a sound economy is the gov'ts obligation to the public, all economic modelling to be successful must achieve full employment.

So the government should provide jobs for everyone. Got it. How many cars should the government provide?

The private sector is supposed to provide jobs for their capital gains preference.

 

[ding]

That wasn't my question. Do YOU want the government to set wages. All wages. After all wouldn't that be for the public welfare of all?

begging the question is just fallacy.

Minimum wages are already fixed as a Standard in our Republic. Anything more than just right wing fantasy?

Would you like the government to regulate profits as part of the social contract for the general welfare of the people?

Only if we have real times of war and not fake times of war and therefore, optional times of war as indicated by the necessity of real times of war tax rates.

In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

How about prices? Should the government regulate prices to promote the general welfare of the people to fulfill the social contract?

Regulating prices is a function delegated to our federal Congress. Subsidies for agriculture and intellectual property don't seem to be bad.

It does to me. The role of the government is to do for the people what the people cannot do for themselves. Not what they can and should do for their self. But getting back to your social contract for the welfare of the good of the people argument, if that can only be accomplished for all people by the government setting prices for everything, is that what we should do?