| Author |
Message |
    
Fredfast
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 08:20 am: | 
|
"It's merely a redundant property of the justice, tranquility, defense and liberty."
Huh? |
Pwnzor
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 08:31 am: |
|
I didn't really expect you to understand.
It's apparent to pretty much everyone that your mind simply can't handle the concept of self reliance.
Welfare doesn't mean money.
Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for life.
Get it? No, I didn't think so. |
Chauly
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 08:38 am: |
|
"Promote the general welfare" is an entirely different concept than "provide" or "ensure" the general welfare.
Patrick, part of the semantic problem is the perception of our earnings to be ours, or theirs. The former is that we try to keep it away from the government (credit); the latter is that the government owns it all, and they give it to whomever they want (better than you can), like Solyndra, or us, in the form of a tax refund or deduction. This is illustrated by the phrase "giving a tax cut"...
If the government wants to truly promote an ideal (like "solar power"), then a tax credit should be the most efficient way to do it: no middleman or bureaucrat to skim off their cut, or diverting it to their favorite political donors. Strokes is not gaming the system; he's doing exactly what the social engineers want him to do, and he's using his own money to do it, not some other taxpayer's.
I bought a Prius back before they were cool (?), and the Feds had a tax credit on the car. Did I take it off my taxes? You bet. I cut my taxes. Did it drive up spending? Only in a double-speak sort of way ("If we let them keep too much, then that's costing us money."). I want to wrap my head in duct tape to keep it from exploding sometimes...
If I had my druthers, I would set up the tax system such that we designate which government spending of my taxes is funded on my 1040. Additionally, I would allow a tax credit of 100% if you use your before-tax money to privately fund something that the government then doesn't have to spend money on, with a concomitant decrease in funds coming from the government. If I endow a new nature center in my local Federal Park, then that's money deducted from my taxes and the Federal Budget. This will eventually "starve the beast", and return a lot of stuff (like charity and education) to truly local control.
(Message edited by Chauly on February 26, 2014) |
Fredfast
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 08:54 am: |
|
"Promote"
Seems that everyone needs to refer to Merriam -Webster.
verb
1.
further the progress of (something, esp. a cause, venture, or aim); support or actively encourage.
"some regulation is still required to promote competition"
synonyms: encourage, advocate, further, advance, assist, aid, help, contribute to, foster, nurture, develop, boost, stimulate, forward, work for More
antonyms: obstruct
Notice the quote they use. |
Chauly
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 08:59 am: |
|
I still didn't see "provide", "ensure", "guarantee", "give", "supply", "subsidize", or "fund" in that list. |
Fredfast
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 09:28 am: |
|
"I still didn't see "provide", "ensure", "guarantee", "give", "supply", "subsidize", or "fund" in that list."
All of the above are ways to "promote". |
Xdigitalx
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 09:51 am: |
|
The lefts argument without fail, still reminds me of the term:
"Don't wanna, can't make me, so THERE" |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 10:00 am: |
|
Everyone take a step back and put on your reading glasses.
The preamble to the constitution does not state the functions for which the federal government is responsible. It states the REASONS they wrote the constitution. That's where it ends.
The constitution that then proceeds goes on to describe, in detail, the responsibilities and the structure of the federal government. It also states quite clearly that if it doesn't say it, the government can't do it. Our founders would not recognize the government we have today.
You know what, I take that back. They would recognize it. They would say it looks like the tyranny they rebelled against. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 10:35 am: |
|
I post Then he posts. I follow?
That is the same lack of understanding of cause and effect that has cons tell us that the oceans warmed releasing CO2 and the CO2 caused the warming.
While on a quantum level cause effect is seemingly different it is simpler on a macro level.
So Polly, babies cause sex?
Hoot beat.me to the truth on the "promote" business.
Thar clause in the preamble is the most abused idea.
What can I not do with that excuse? |
Macbuell
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 01:28 pm: |
|
I post Then he posts. I follow?
I noticed the same thing.
Fred is a drone who should just be ignored. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 02:25 pm: |
|
True. But I figure this outlet makes the rest of the planet a safer place......
So to promote the common good............ we keep talking about stuff he is ignorantly opinionated on.
The fact that he is as wrong about nearly everything as Just Joe Biden is just icing on the cupcake. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 02:26 pm: |
|
Chauly your post deserves a more involved response than I have time for right now...... but I am in general agreement. |
Kenm123t
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - 10:47 pm: |
|
Aes I understand your point but its time we changed tactics. When your dealing with pests you have to finish the job. You remember the orders of magnitude in roach reproduction rates. |
|
