Is it just me?

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Wasn't the effect of the "new deal" to even out massive discrepancies between the wealthiest or poorest citizens? With countries like Brazil, you have a small segment of the population with vast wealth, and the masses with very little. The US already has the highest levels of income inequality (between richest and poorest citizens) of first world nations. Do you really want to head into "third world" territory in terms of the distribution of wealth in your country?

Show me the lines anywhere in our founding documents (Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Federalist Papers, etc) that show where that's a function the government is supposed to be doing, and I'll raise you the Tenth Amendment to show you that it's not.

I'm not a US citizen, so I'm not totally clued in re: the US Constitution. What's the part of the constitution which says the government may tax people, and use the money for roads, a postal system, etc? Isn't there a general statement right at the start of that segment, saying the government can tax people, and use the money for the general good of the people?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: glenn1

Wasn't the effect of the "new deal" to even out massive discrepancies between the wealthiest or poorest citizens? With countries like Brazil, you have a small segment of the population with vast wealth, and the masses with very little. The US already has the highest levels of income inequality (between richest and poorest citizens) of first world nations. Do you really want to head into "third world" territory in terms of the distribution of wealth in your country?

Show me the lines anywhere in our founding documents (Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Federalist Papers, etc) that show where that's a function the government is supposed to be doing, and I'll raise you the Tenth Amendment to show you that it's not.

US Constitution, Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I know you cons stop reading at "common Defence"

Aha! That's the line I was thinking of. It is easy to argue that a welfare safety net, or system of social security, is in the community's benefit.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: glenn1

Wasn't the effect of the "new deal" to even out massive discrepancies between the wealthiest or poorest citizens? With countries like Brazil, you have a small segment of the population with vast wealth, and the masses with very little. The US already has the highest levels of income inequality (between richest and poorest citizens) of first world nations. Do you really want to head into "third world" territory in terms of the distribution of wealth in your country?

Show me the lines anywhere in our founding documents (Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Federalist Papers, etc) that show where that's a function the government is supposed to be doing, and I'll raise you the Tenth Amendment to show you that it's not.

US Constitution, Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I know you cons stop reading at "common Defence"

I somehow doubt the founding fathers meant ah meant that as wealth redistribution.

I doubt the founding fathers intended for women to work as lawyers, or same-sex couples to marry (or not marry, for that matter). The US Supreme Court is charged with the task of interpreting the US Constitution - not pseudo-libertarians or pseudo-conservatives such as yourself.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glenn1
If he could "renege the New Deal" in a way which is equitable to all it would be the greatest achievement in the history of the Republic.

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!

Ronald Reagan October 27, 1964

Let's hope when the end comes - the one presiding pulls this quote as a victory quote.

CsG

The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.

Franklin D. Roosevelt: Second Inaugural Address January 20, 1937

Put in sig for your future reference

I'm not a socialist because I think people should be responsible for themselves and their families, so no thanks. Maybe someday we'll ween people off the National teet...

CsG

There you go again inappropriately using "socialist" when you mean "social democrat".

socialism - economic system where the means of production and distribution of goods and services is owned by the people.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Actually people in the past and current are getting more than they paid in.

I can accept that. I am beyond the income cap in SS taxes. It would be ok with me to raise them and take more out to fund the system. Would it hurt me? Not really. Not that the money doesnt matter, I am not that well off, but if it helps others that's a price I am willing to pay not to live in a two class society.

I guess technically you are already living in a two class society.

First class: the wealthiest 1% of Americans get half a trillion dollars in tax cuts from Bush
Second class: get sweet fvck all in tax cuts.

The solution has to be making the very wealthy (that top 1-5%) pay more. The solution is not putting even more of a financial burden on the middle class.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno
Getting 51% of the vote isn't that bad. Heck Clinton got a lot less than that and won.

Take a look at approval ratings and you can see that it's pointless to compare Clinton and Bush. Hell, go ahead and use some Fox polls while you're at it.

 

[genghislegacy]

oh

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glenn1
If he could "renege the New Deal" in a way which is equitable to all it would be the greatest achievement in the history of the Republic.

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!

Ronald Reagan October 27, 1964

Let's hope when the end comes - the one presiding pulls this quote as a victory quote.

CsG

The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.

Franklin D. Roosevelt: Second Inaugural Address January 20, 1937

Put in sig for your future reference

I'm not a socialist because I think people should be responsible for themselves and their families, so no thanks. Maybe someday we'll ween people off the National teet...

CsG

There you go again inappropriately using "socialist" when you mean "social democrat".

socialism - economic system where the means of production and distribution of goods and services is owned by the people.

:roll: whatever keeps the "people's sheets" of your bed dry...

My use was well within the bounds of it's definition, just because you don't understand it - doesn't mean it was inappropriate.

CsG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Umm, Americans have paid more into SS than they have taken out. If anything, they voted future generations into their pockets, since they left behind a trustfund of government bonds to pay for future retirees.

No, their money has been spent - on them and by them.

I can't wait to hand my kids their college fund when they go to college. Won't their faces be filled with joy when they see all the money I've put in there for them...ofcourse it's all just IOUs I've written to myself since they begged for this, that, and other things during their childhood that I tapped into the fund for.

:laugh:

CsG

ST - do you understand this yet?

CsG

 

[drpootums]

Bush won...deal with it

When democrats win its "hey look at us, we won! In yo' face!" while when republicans win "OMFG!!! Voter fraud, somethings wrong, they stole the election *scream like Al Gore*"