Why I dont want the govt to send checks to americans

[TNHarley]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

 

[bendog]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Gerald Ford was a leftist. (-:

But seriously, just giving people money may not really increase consumption, and that is the aim. We're looking at possibly best case 30-40% unemployment if we "shelter in place." I'm better placed to weather this job wise than most, but if I get a thousand bucks, I'm saving it because my wife's car has 200plusK and we'll need a new computer in it soon. I've already spent a chunk of cash on my kid's education, and am still spending. So I'm not even close to rolling in dough. But the people who will really spend any stimulus immediately are the soon to be unemployed. To the extent we can, we need to make up their pay checks, and make it possible for the small biz owners who will have to close up to have the ability to reopen 3-6 mos down the line.

I lived through it. Hurrican Rita. I personally tried to get into Wal-Mart in Galveston Texas after the first checks went out and there were big screen TV cartons strewn abut the parking lot as they loaded them into buggies and pushed them down the road jabbering and grinning.

The checks go to people who have proven to be incompetent with money already. But I guess thats the point. Its really a handout to corporations via people who have no sense of delayed gratification. If these checks go out again it will be the same...cellphones and TVs.

Well, it just seems to me that the people who made and served the Caesar salad I had two weeks ago, and the people at my favorite hamburger dive, are not going to have jobs shortly, and they will miss their rent and have food insecurity. They have a need that is not because they can't manage money or don't work. And, the whole point of having safety net programs, and even soc sec to an extent, is to make sure that we continue to have consumer demand during recessions so that the entire economy doesn't crash.

I think Gerald Ford had good intentions, and so does Mitt Romney, but you're right that just giving every 1K will not keep the laid off workers above water and basically have people buy …. shit.

What's with the references to Gerald Ford?

Oh he tried something similar in the 70s. He gave each taxpayer a $200 rebate.

Tax Reduction Act of 1975 - Wikipedia

And I distinctly recall my father and I both put ours in savings. I was working construction, but was shortly after laid off when the housing market failed. So I used the money to go back to college. It was great, but I was indictive of why Ford's program did not jump start the economy with consumer demand. People weren't spending anymore than they had to because we feared losing jobs. Give the money to people who already lost the jobs.

 

[Pogo]

Of course a few of our resident statists would funny the OP

Well shit, look at its first five words.

Our constitution is funny?

I'm not one of the ones who funnied it. But if I had, that would be reason enough right there. And don't try to weasel-word your way out of your own verb. I see right through that shit.

 

[g5000]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

I will never take anyone whining about "free shit" seriously until I hear them calling for an end to tax expenditures which overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy and tilt the playing field in their favor.

That's over a trillion dollars a year in "free shit".

I am sick and tired of ignorant assholes who blame the poor for our problems and deficits.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

"Unconstitutional" seems to be a term they're flinging without understanding what it means. As if they don't have to explain it.

I can explain it.

James Madison, Federalist 41:
"Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the 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,’’ amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases."

Thomas Jefferson:
“The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”

 

[Pogo]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Gerald Ford was a leftist. (-:

But seriously, just giving people money may not really increase consumption, and that is the aim. We're looking at possibly best case 30-40% unemployment if we "shelter in place." I'm better placed to weather this job wise than most, but if I get a thousand bucks, I'm saving it because my wife's car has 200plusK and we'll need a new computer in it soon. I've already spent a chunk of cash on my kid's education, and am still spending. So I'm not even close to rolling in dough. But the people who will really spend any stimulus immediately are the soon to be unemployed. To the extent we can, we need to make up their pay checks, and make it possible for the small biz owners who will have to close up to have the ability to reopen 3-6 mos down the line.

I lived through it. Hurrican Rita. I personally tried to get into Wal-Mart in Galveston Texas after the first checks went out and there were big screen TV cartons strewn abut the parking lot as they loaded them into buggies and pushed them down the road jabbering and grinning.

The checks go to people who have proven to be incompetent with money already. But I guess thats the point. Its really a handout to corporations via people who have no sense of delayed gratification. If these checks go out again it will be the same...cellphones and TVs.

Well, it just seems to me that the people who made and served the Caesar salad I had two weeks ago, and the people at my favorite hamburger dive, are not going to have jobs shortly, and they will miss their rent and have food insecurity. They have a need that is not because they can't manage money or don't work. And, the whole point of having safety net programs, and even soc sec to an extent, is to make sure that we continue to have consumer demand during recessions so that the entire economy doesn't crash.

I think Gerald Ford had good intentions, and so does Mitt Romney, but you're right that just giving every 1K will not keep the laid off workers above water and basically have people buy …. shit.

What's with the references to Gerald Ford?

Oh he tried something similar in the 70s. He gave each taxpayer a $200 rebate.

Tax Reduction Act of 1975 - Wikipedia

And I distinctly recall my father and I both put ours in savings. I was working construction, but was shortly after laid off when the housing market failed. So I used the money to go back to college. It was great, but I was indictive of why Ford's program did not jump start the economy with consumer demand. People weren't spending anymore than they had to because we feared losing jobs. Give the money to people who already lost the jobs.

That must have been so significant I have no memory of it.

I remember Bush's, what was it supposed to be, $300? $500:? Whatever, I got a check for thirteen dollars and seventy-four cents.

 

[bendog]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

it's more the taxing and spending clause
Taxing and Spending Clause - Wikipedia

 

[g5000]

"Unconstitutional" seems to be a term they're flinging without understanding what it means. As if they don't have to explain it.

I can explain it.

James Madison, Federalist 41:
"Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the 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,’’ amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases."

Thomas Jefferson:
“The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”

Jefferson and Madison, eh?

Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise.

To James Madison Fontainebleau Oct. 28 1785; The Letters of Thomas Jefferson

 

[Pogo]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

 

[Pogo]

"Unconstitutional" seems to be a term they're flinging without understanding what it means. As if they don't have to explain it.

I can explain it.

James Madison, Federalist 41:
"Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the 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,’’ amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases."

Thomas Jefferson:
“The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”

Yeah um.................... that's not the Constitution.

 

[bendog]

Gerald Ford was a leftist. (-:

But seriously, just giving people money may not really increase consumption, and that is the aim. We're looking at possibly best case 30-40% unemployment if we "shelter in place." I'm better placed to weather this job wise than most, but if I get a thousand bucks, I'm saving it because my wife's car has 200plusK and we'll need a new computer in it soon. I've already spent a chunk of cash on my kid's education, and am still spending. So I'm not even close to rolling in dough. But the people who will really spend any stimulus immediately are the soon to be unemployed. To the extent we can, we need to make up their pay checks, and make it possible for the small biz owners who will have to close up to have the ability to reopen 3-6 mos down the line.

I lived through it. Hurrican Rita. I personally tried to get into Wal-Mart in Galveston Texas after the first checks went out and there were big screen TV cartons strewn abut the parking lot as they loaded them into buggies and pushed them down the road jabbering and grinning.

The checks go to people who have proven to be incompetent with money already. But I guess thats the point. Its really a handout to corporations via people who have no sense of delayed gratification. If these checks go out again it will be the same...cellphones and TVs.

Well, it just seems to me that the people who made and served the Caesar salad I had two weeks ago, and the people at my favorite hamburger dive, are not going to have jobs shortly, and they will miss their rent and have food insecurity. They have a need that is not because they can't manage money or don't work. And, the whole point of having safety net programs, and even soc sec to an extent, is to make sure that we continue to have consumer demand during recessions so that the entire economy doesn't crash.

I think Gerald Ford had good intentions, and so does Mitt Romney, but you're right that just giving every 1K will not keep the laid off workers above water and basically have people buy …. shit.

What's with the references to Gerald Ford?

I have no recollections from 1978 to 2004. (-:

Oh he tried something similar in the 70s. He gave each taxpayer a $200 rebate.

Tax Reduction Act of 1975 - Wikipedia

And I distinctly recall my father and I both put ours in savings. I was working construction, but was shortly after laid off when the housing market failed. So I used the money to go back to college. It was great, but I was indictive of why Ford's program did not jump start the economy with consumer demand. People weren't spending anymore than they had to because we feared losing jobs. Give the money to people who already lost the jobs.

That must have been so significant I have no memory of it.

I remember Bush's, what was it supposed to be, $300? $500:? Whatever, I got a check for thirteen dollars and seventy-four cents.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I will never take anyone whining about "free shit" seriously until I hear them calling for an end to tax expenditures which overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy and tilt the playing field in their favor.

That's over a trillion dollars a year in "free shit".

I am sick and tired of fucking assholes who blame the poor for our problems and deficits.

The problem is SPENDING, not revenue. 50% of the people pay ZERO taxes and another 35% actually profit from taxes (Earned Income Credit etc). When everyone is taxed, you can bitch. Until then, STFU.

Why not rid us all of the progressive commie tax system and go to a flat fucking tax or a national sales tax?

I bet your goose-stepping commie ass hates that idea, don't you.

.

 

[g5000]

As long as we are bringing up our Founders. Here's Thomas Paine, author of Common Sense, who thought we should all receive a universal basic income once we turn 21 years of age, and a government pension when we reach the age of 50.

Having thus in a few words, opened the merits of the case, I shall now proceed to the plan I have to propose, which is, To create a National Fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twentyone years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property: And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/Paine1795.pdf[

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yeah um.................... that's not the Constitution.

Uhmmmm.....yeah. It's just the FUCKING DUDES WHO WROTE IT and it shows intent.

You're a dumbfuck.

.

 

[Pogo]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Not seeing how it's unconstitutional.

Please point to that enumerated power in the constitution then.
I'll wait.

BAM, there it is. Right into his own trap.

You see young'un, the Constitution doesn't spell out what the government can do. It spells out what the government CAN'T do.

By your logic this internet is "unConstitutional". Nowhere does the Constitution mention the internet.

Nor does it mention driving, flying, radio, television, interstate highways, telegraph, not even a freaking fax machine. Are they all "unConstitutional" too?

See what I mean about using terms you don't understand?

 

[g5000]

I will never take anyone whining about "free shit" seriously until I hear them calling for an end to tax expenditures which overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy and tilt the playing field in their favor.

That's over a trillion dollars a year in "free shit".

I am sick and tired of fucking assholes who blame the poor for our problems and deficits.

The problem is SPENDING, not revenue.

.

Tax EXPENDITURES are spending, moron.

ex·pend·i·ture
/ikˈspendəCHər/

noun

1. the action of spending funds.
   "the expenditure of taxpayers' money"
   
   • an amount of money spent.

 

[Pogo]

Yeah um.................... that's not the Constitution.

Uhmmmm.....yeah. It's just the FUCKING DUDES WHO WROTE IT and it shows intent.

You're a dumbfuck.

I'm not the one who can't figure out the difference between a given document and not-that-given-document, so I don't think so Hunior.

 

[g5000]

Why not rid us all of the progressive commie tax system and go to a flat fucking tax or a national sales tax?

I bet your goose-stepping commie ass hates that idea, don't you.

.

Please see the quote from that old commie Thomas Jefferson in post 48.

 

[Crepitus]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Not seeing how it's unconstitutional.

Please point to that enumerated power in the constitution then.
I'll wait.

Lol, the Constitution is not a Nazi style "alles verboten" document.

No matter how much you tRumplings want it to be.

 

[g5000]

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise." - Goose-stepping commie ass Thomas Jefferson