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.
Rich people got that way because, by and large, they built businesses that produce goods and services that people WANT. Whereas government becomes rich by taxing the people who actually produce value in society. Which one sounds more "compassionate" to you?
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Baloney. Good government has always FOLLOWED commerce and industry, not the other way around. You start out with a few farms or ranches and eventually somebody sees the market and puts in a small local grocery or hardware or farm implement store so folks don't have to drive so far for a few nails or a loaf of bread. And then another store moves in to offer blacksmith or repair services. Another will fix shoes or dry clean clothes or offer plumbing and electrical services. Eventually it makes sense to hire a law enforcement person to help protect the various properties from the very occasional thief or vandal. Then the people band together to form a volunteer fire department to lower everybody's fire insurance premiums. And to protect the ground water, they elect to have s shared water system and eventually a sewer system. And eventually it makes sense to incorporate the village and hire somebody to oversee and regulate all the shared services. Sooner or later roads will be paved and extended and linked to larger transportation routes and other amenities will be added, all authorized by bonds voted by the citizens.
But the roads, the infrastructure, the shared services are all determined to be necessary by the people who will be payng for them and it all is created because the need already exists. The Founders did not build a post road to nowhere on the theory somebody might need that at some time. They built them to serve the people where they already were.
That is what 'promote the general welfare' meant to the Founding Fathers whether at the local, country, state, or federal level--government services that meet an existing need and cannot be accomplished as efficiently and effectively by the private sector. Otherwise it is the duty of government to free up the private sector to thrive and flourish as it chooses to do.
Rich people got that way because, by and large, they built businesses that produce goods and services that people WANT. Whereas government becomes rich by taxing the people who actually produce value in society. Which one sounds more "compassionate" to you?
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Sure it would. Name one thing government provides that business couldn't provide on its own.
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Baloney. Good government has always FOLLOWED commerce and industry, not the other way around. You start out with a few farms or ranches and eventually somebody sees the market and puts in a small local grocery or hardware or farm implement store so folks don't have to drive so far for a few nails or a loaf of bread. And then another store moves in to offer blacksmith or repair services. Another will fix shoes or dry clean clothes or offer plumbing and electrical services. Eventually it makes sense to hire a law enforcement person to help protect the various properties from the very occasional thief or vandal. Then the people band together to form a volunteer fire department to lower everybody's fire insurance premiums. And to protect the ground water, they elect to have s shared water system and eventually a sewer system. And eventually it makes sense to incorporate the village and hire somebody to oversee and regulate all the shared services. Sooner or later roads will be paved and extended and linked to larger transportation routes and other amenities will be added, all authorized by bonds voted by the citizens.
But the roads, the infrastructure, the shared services are all determined to be necessary by the people who will be payng for them and it all is created because the need already exists. The Founders did not build a post road to nowhere on the theory somebody might need that at some time. They built them to serve the people where they already were.
That is what 'promote the general welfare' meant to the Founding Fathers whether at the local, country, state, or federal level--government services that meet an existing need and cannot be accomplished as efficiently and effectively by the private sector. Otherwise it is the duty of government to free up the private sector to thrive and flourish as it chooses to do.
Played SimCity have ya?
The United States of America is the largest municipal corporation in the world. Trying to run that corporation with a business plan 200+ years old is STUPID.
Here's some reality for ya.
EVERY sale that a business makes is helped either directly or indirectly by the government. The customer needs to get to the store. The store needs to get to the customer. The government made that happen!
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Sure it would. Name one thing government provides that business couldn't provide on its own.
Customers.
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Baloney. Good government has always FOLLOWED commerce and industry, not the other way around. You start out with a few farms or ranches and eventually somebody sees the market and puts in a small local grocery or hardware or farm implement store so folks don't have to drive so far for a few nails or a loaf of bread. And then another store moves in to offer blacksmith or repair services. Another will fix shoes or dry clean clothes or offer plumbing and electrical services. Eventually it makes sense to hire a law enforcement person to help protect the various properties from the very occasional thief or vandal. Then the people band together to form a volunteer fire department to lower everybody's fire insurance premiums. And to protect the ground water, they elect to have s shared water system and eventually a sewer system. And eventually it makes sense to incorporate the village and hire somebody to oversee and regulate all the shared services. Sooner or later roads will be paved and extended and linked to larger transportation routes and other amenities will be added, all authorized by bonds voted by the citizens.
But the roads, the infrastructure, the shared services are all determined to be necessary by the people who will be payng for them and it all is created because the need already exists. The Founders did not build a post road to nowhere on the theory somebody might need that at some time. They built them to serve the people where they already were.
That is what 'promote the general welfare' meant to the Founding Fathers whether at the local, country, state, or federal level--government services that meet an existing need and cannot be accomplished as efficiently and effectively by the private sector. Otherwise it is the duty of government to free up the private sector to thrive and flourish as it chooses to do.
Played SimCity have ya?
The United States of America is the largest municipal corporation in the world. Trying to run that corporation with a business plan 200+ years old is STUPID.
Here's some reality for ya.
EVERY sale that a business makes is helped either directly or indirectly by the government. The customer needs to get to the store. The store needs to get to the customer. The government made that happen!
Sure it would. Name one thing government provides that business couldn't provide on its own.
Customers.
People rounded up at gunpoint are hostages, not customers.
Baloney. Good government has always FOLLOWED commerce and industry, not the other way around. You start out with a few farms or ranches and eventually somebody sees the market and puts in a small local grocery or hardware or farm implement store so folks don't have to drive so far for a few nails or a loaf of bread. And then another store moves in to offer blacksmith or repair services. Another will fix shoes or dry clean clothes or offer plumbing and electrical services. Eventually it makes sense to hire a law enforcement person to help protect the various properties from the very occasional thief or vandal. Then the people band together to form a volunteer fire department to lower everybody's fire insurance premiums. And to protect the ground water, they elect to have s shared water system and eventually a sewer system. And eventually it makes sense to incorporate the village and hire somebody to oversee and regulate all the shared services. Sooner or later roads will be paved and extended and linked to larger transportation routes and other amenities will be added, all authorized by bonds voted by the citizens.
But the roads, the infrastructure, the shared services are all determined to be necessary by the people who will be payng for them and it all is created because the need already exists. The Founders did not build a post road to nowhere on the theory somebody might need that at some time. They built them to serve the people where they already were.
That is what 'promote the general welfare' meant to the Founding Fathers whether at the local, country, state, or federal level--government services that meet an existing need and cannot be accomplished as efficiently and effectively by the private sector. Otherwise it is the duty of government to free up the private sector to thrive and flourish as it chooses to do.
Played SimCity have ya?
The United States of America is the largest municipal corporation in the world. Trying to run that corporation with a business plan 200+ years old is STUPID.
Here's some reality for ya.
EVERY sale that a business makes is helped either directly or indirectly by the government. The customer needs to get to the store. The store needs to get to the customer. The government made that happen!
Have you ever heard of the Amish?
Government is necessary for some things, but should do as little as possible, and should confine itself to important functions that private persons or groups CANNOT DO AT ALL. Examples include National Defense, smoothing the course of interstate commerce with minimal interference in that commerce, conducting foreign relations, setting national standards for money, weights, and measures, dispassionately pursuing and prosecuting criminal behavior, etc.
Occasional events like wars might cause govt departments designed to deal with them, to grow to a size appropriate to do so. But afterward govt must reduce back to its smaller size.
If you feel that government can do something better than private people or groups can do it, that's insufficient reason to grant govt authority to do it. If private people can do it at all, it must be denied to govt unequivocally.
The reason for these restrictions, is that:
(a) Government cannot do anything well, due in part to the fact that no one can compete with it, and will always be rife with sloth and inefficiency;
(b) Government's only ability is to restrict and punish its citizens. This is activity extremely vulnerable to abuse, and capable of damaging and destroying lives by the millions if not carefully watched and restrained.
(c) History grimly shows that when government is allowed more authority than necessary, the imperfect humans it's made of begin to abuse that power, virtually every time. And with time, that abuse only increases, often rising to disastrous levels.
For these reasons, the powers given to government must be carefull spelled out and restricted, with those it restricts retaining full power to change or abolish it.
Whether those words are his or not, so long as we retain the inalienable right to bear arms this quote bears with it a monumental truth.You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
Played SimCity have ya?
The United States of America is the largest municipal corporation in the world. Trying to run that corporation with a business plan 200+ years old is STUPID.
Here's some reality for ya.
EVERY sale that a business makes is helped either directly or indirectly by the government. The customer needs to get to the store. The store needs to get to the customer. The government made that happen!
All of which wouldn't have been possible without the government.
Sure it would. Name one thing government provides that business couldn't provide on its own.
Customers.
Sure it would. Name one thing government provides that business couldn't provide on its own.
Customers.
Tell that to the Amish, who do just fine working hard selling furniture and garden produce all without any government assistance.
If the private sector can defend the country better than the government,
It can't. Govt is required, to organize and MANDATE the things necessary for defense.
Why?
That wasn't original intent.
Original intent was to have small state run militias.
So why isn't that the case now?
Customers.
Tell that to the Amish, who do just fine working hard selling furniture and garden produce all without any government assistance.
Who do they sell their goods and services to?
EDIT: Before a meaningless fight breaks out, I should point out I agree with you. We gravitate toward the Amish because their work has no tax.
Tell that to the Amish, who do just fine working hard selling furniture and garden produce all without any government assistance.
Who do they sell their goods and services to?
EDIT: Before a meaningless fight breaks out, I should point out I agree with you. We gravitate toward the Amish because their work has no tax.
They come together to provide all the needs of those within their own community first, then graciously sell their products on the side of the road to whoever else is in need of their service. They rely on no public transportation and seek no government "hand outs". So tell me what dependency do they really have in government? They are VERY self supporting, even as far as providing their own manure if you want to get into detailed specifics. Not to mention they own the only transportation that doesn't require an emissions test, unless you are just asking to get kicked.
Annenberg Classroom - Article I Section 8
Section 8 - The Text
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;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
It can't. Govt is required, to organize and MANDATE the things necessary for defense.
Why?
That wasn't original intent.
Original intent was to have small state run militias.
So why isn't that the case now?
Congress SHALL have the power "To declare war". That's kind of hard to do if you don't have a military force available, wouldn't you say? Then the Constitution specifically instructs Congress
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."
Then there is the Presidential oath "to uphold, preserve, and DEFEND the Constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. Now with respect to the "original" intent, I can assure you that does not include the views of THIS administration, which is to read the Miranda rights and lawyer up terrorists that are captured overseas.
Perhaps you need to read the Constitution again, specifically the roles given to each branch of the Federal Government.
Why?
That wasn't original intent.
Original intent was to have small state run militias.
So why isn't that the case now?
Congress SHALL have the power "To declare war". That's kind of hard to do if you don't have a military force available, wouldn't you say? Then the Constitution specifically instructs Congress
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."
Then there is the Presidential oath "to uphold, preserve, and DEFEND the Constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. Now with respect to the "original" intent, I can assure you that does not include the views of THIS administration, which is to read the Miranda rights and lawyer up terrorists that are captured overseas.
Perhaps you need to read the Constitution again, specifically the roles given to each branch of the Federal Government.
First off you skipped over the appropriation of funding that is to be for no longer than 2 years part.
Secondly..that's primarily what the SECOND AMENDMENT was all about. To have an armed and ready force of men without having to PAY for it.
Third..I don't know what you are babbling about with Miranda rights. Some of your brethren are all upset over the use of drones to kill terrorists. And many have died that way. I don't recall Osama being read anything.
Perhaps you should take your own advice. Additionally..pick up the Federalist papers. James Madison is pretty clear about a standing army.
Congress SHALL have the power "To declare war". That's kind of hard to do if you don't have a military force available, wouldn't you say? Then the Constitution specifically instructs Congress
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."
Then there is the Presidential oath "to uphold, preserve, and DEFEND the Constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. Now with respect to the "original" intent, I can assure you that does not include the views of THIS administration, which is to read the Miranda rights and lawyer up terrorists that are captured overseas.
Perhaps you need to read the Constitution again, specifically the roles given to each branch of the Federal Government.
First off you skipped over the appropriation of funding that is to be for no longer than 2 years part.
Secondly..that's primarily what the SECOND AMENDMENT was all about. To have an armed and ready force of men without having to PAY for it.
Third..I don't know what you are babbling about with Miranda rights. Some of your brethren are all upset over the use of drones to kill terrorists. And many have died that way. I don't recall Osama being read anything.
Perhaps you should take your own advice. Additionally..pick up the Federalist papers. James Madison is pretty clear about a standing army.
Some of us do not utilize the arguments of ancient men in order to solidify our points. Regardless of Madison, my stance on a standing army is rather clear and my stance on the use of drones, let alone conflicts in the Middle East are quite clear.
Are you telling me you agree with the drone strikes Obama approved knowing full well who the victims would be? Before you "unknowingly" comply, you should know the victims of these attacks were, and were intended to be women and children. I have but a plethora of evidence to comply with my position. You have been warned.
Who do they sell their goods and services to?
EDIT: Before a meaningless fight breaks out, I should point out I agree with you. We gravitate toward the Amish because their work has no tax.
They come together to provide all the needs of those within their own community first, then graciously sell their products on the side of the road to whoever else is in need of their service. They rely on no public transportation and seek no government "hand outs". So tell me what dependency do they really have in government? They are VERY self supporting, even as far as providing their own manure if you want to get into detailed specifics. Not to mention they own the only transportation that doesn't require an emissions test, unless you are just asking to get kicked.
They are a community, and as such come together. On this point I can neither argue nor disagree, they do this as well as the native americans whom inhabited this land before we stole it.
Past the issue of community, I urge you to research whom you are speaking to before you declare your own opinion as truth. I live in Marion County of Ohio but reside in a village called La Rue, approximately ten miles from a village called Hepburn. I live in amish country.
It is true, they take care of themselves first and they do it very well, but there are a multitude of circumstances you haven't considered. First and foremost, they are religiously exempt from all taxes. They keep an absolute 100% of their income, and they use their income in order to provide for their community.
The only thing Amish sell on the road is extraneous food resources. They are able to sell this food cheaply due to their exemption from taxes. Without this exemption they would have no hope in competing, and as it stands they have little hope in competing with the major corporations. It isn't as though they sell these good graciously as though they had no need to do so, they have an absolute need to push their good unto others. They must heat their homes which lie off our infrastructures, and they must pay for the beginnings of the next season. The Amish are my neighbors, and I assure you I know more of their culture than you would ever hope to know short of being bred into their community. Without the assistance of government, even they would not compare to my local farmers who fall victim of MONSANTO.
