Why I dont want the govt to send checks to americans

[TNHarley]

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.

I have stated multiple times i want to end all tax expenditures.
Asshole.

 

[g5000]

"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 twenty one 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." - Goose-stepping commie ass Thomas Paine

A universal basic income AND Social Security!

 

[White 6]

Makes no sense

Most Americans are working or are somewhat wealthy. They will just waste the money.

Instead of $1000 to everyone, why not $10,000 to the people who really need it? Send it to those who lost their jobs due to the virus, small businesses that were forced to shut down, those who have to take care of sick members of their family

Very true, and a better use of the money. By the same token, the top 3% did not need the Hump tax break as they were already sitting pretty and the Obama stabilized economy was still on a nice slow steady uptick without it.

 

[TNHarley]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

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

Yes, that clause is where the "general welfare" part comes in.

 

[TNHarley]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

The fed gov is given a set of enumerated powers, then states everything else is left to the states. THATS where it "prohibits" it

 

[TNHarley]

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?

It gives them a list of enumerated powers.
Dumbass

 

[The Original Tree]

A better thing they could do is tell Credit Card Companies to suspend interest on all credit cards for a month.

Got some high balances, Stumpy?

No, just thinking about how poor people like you overuse your credit cards.

 

[TNHarley]

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.

It is until an amendment is properly passed.

 

[The Original Tree]

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.

No on on Welfare should get a check. What's the point? We are already supporting them.

 

[g5000]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

The fed gov is given a set of enumerated powers, then states everything else is left to the states. THATS where it "prohibits" it

Here's a nice article about where Congress gets the power of distributing welfare money, which is what this "stimulus" is.

General Welfare

 

[Dick Foster]

Does anyone stop to consider where that money is coming from. Like as not they're cranking up the printing presses and watering down the money in your pocket and savings.

Nothing comes for free, not ever and not anything. It all comes out of someone's pocket and like as not it will include your own.

 

[TNHarley]

Mr. Govt expansion himself, alexander Hamilton
This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended

 

[TNHarley]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

The fed gov is given a set of enumerated powers, then states everything else is left to the states. THATS where it "prohibits" it

Here's a nice article about where Congress gets the power of distributing welfare money, which is what this "stimulus" is.

General Welfare

Yes, it gives them the power to spend for general welfare while not exceeding the enunerated powers.
If congress could just decide what is good for the welfare, they could soend money on anything and renders the entire constitution redundent.
Like killing babies. Or punishing children for sins of the father.
Goddamn statists drive me nuts

 

[g5000]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

The fed gov is given a set of enumerated powers, then states everything else is left to the states. THATS where it "prohibits" it

Here's a nice article about where Congress gets the power of distributing welfare money, which is what this "stimulus" is.

General Welfare

Yes, it gives them the power to spend for general welfare while not exceeding the enunerated powers.
If congress could just decide what is good for the welfare, they could soend money on anything and renders the entire constitution redundent.
Like killing babies. Or punishing children for sins of the father.
Goddamn statists drive me nuts

You should stop and take the time to read the link.

 

[g5000]

From the link I provided:

Congress appropriates money for a seemingly endless number of national interests, ranging from federal courts, policing, imprisonment, and national security to social programs, environmental protection, and education. No federal court has struck down a spending program on the ground that it failed to promote the general welfare. However, federal spending programs have been struck down on other constitutional grounds.

 

[TNHarley]

Watch these morons use "general welfare"

Very good, you've got to the Preamble.

Now show us where the actual document prohibits it.

The fed gov is given a set of enumerated powers, then states everything else is left to the states. THATS where it "prohibits" it

Here's a nice article about where Congress gets the power of distributing welfare money, which is what this "stimulus" is.

General Welfare

Yes, it gives them the power to spend for general welfare while not exceeding the enunerated powers.
If congress could just decide what is good for the welfare, they could soend money on anything and renders the entire constitution redundent.
Like killing babies. Or punishing children for sins of the father.
Goddamn statists drive me nuts

You should stop and take the time to read the link.

I read it untill i realized it was the same copy paste that every other article uses to shit on the constitution.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

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

Get your mouth off Obama's dick.

.

 

[TNHarley]

From the link I provided:

Congress appropriates money for a seemingly endless number of national interests, ranging from federal courts, policing, imprisonment, and national security to social programs, environmental protection, and education. No federal court has struck down a spending program on the ground that it failed to promote the general welfare. However, federal spending programs have been struck down on other constitutional grounds.

.thats the way our system works but it doesnt mean it is correct.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If "General Welfare" means "any fucking thing we want" the entire remainder of the Constitution is null.

You fuckwads need to go back to lawschool.

.

 

[White 6]

The money would certainly help a lot of Americans that are not working right now and are struggling to pay bills and buy groceries, especially service workers that rely on tips more than they do an actual wage or salary. The amount of people it would help would outweigh the people that will abuse the $1,000 or don't need it as badly as others but a one size fits all approach like that may not be as efficient. In my personal opinion having large amounts of loans sent to small and medium size businesses around the country so that they can continue to meet payroll and pay people while at home would be ideal. I would also suspend federal income tax temporarily so that people are taking home a little more money each week. Just a thought.

I would support putting a hold on payroll tax. Its about the only constitutional thing they can do.

Not highly enthusiastic about cutting payroll tax either. If you are working, it is just a temporary give away that will be paid back to Government at tax time. If you are not working, you are not on a payroll, not getting any benefit at all. Back in the 60s USDA was over a commodities system that and distributed nutrition staple products to needy and supported farm prices, before food stamps and EBT cards. Did they get rid of it because there was a stigma to standing in the lines? Not possible now.