U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:05 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
30,993 posts, read 13,186,321 times
Reputation: 11009

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
That doesn't make any sense. I am a ditto head to myself? Are you high?
I wouldn't mistake you for a founder, even if I were high... but you don't need to be to think so. Comprehension MUST complement reading. Here is another opportunity, re-post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Founding fathers weren't ditto heads... a world y'all seem to want to live in. Take this for example:

"Above all things I hope the education of the common people will be attended to ; convinced that on their good sense we may rely with the most security for the preservation of a due degree of liberty."
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787

Sounds like a socialist or a free marketeer?
Feel better now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
Sure, they had disagreements, but they weren't advocating the tyranny you do.
Only if with twisted idea of tyranny y'all have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:23 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 18,572,179 times
Reputation: 14472
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
The founding fathers wanted the states to act more like countries than state.
That is utter nonsense, for if that were the case they would have stuck with the unworkable Articles of Constitution.

You get an F for 5th grade civics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:26 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 18,572,179 times
Reputation: 14472
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Is the US not violation of the the constitution ? Things like healthcare , social security , crime , businesses tax , drug laws so on not state matter?
Healthcare in the 18th century? What the frack was healthcare government mandated bloodletting for the flu?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:35 PM
 
12,660 posts, read 8,437,665 times
Reputation: 4743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir View Post
That would be a direct violation of Article 1 section 8 of the constitution
Specifically it violates the power of Congress in this enumerated power.


You can't complain about the FedGov violating the COTUS if your solution to fix the FedGov violating the COTUS is to violate the COTUS, in that instance just get rid of it and start over.

One point I'd like to make too, is that the Founders are NOT necessarily the same people as wrote the COTUS, they would be the Framers. Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Patrick Henry, John Hancock and Samuel Adams were not present during the Philadelphia Convention because of either matters of state (Jefferson and John Adams), refusal to participate Henry, or other reasons (the remainder). Madison while considered a founder Jeffersons protege, and author of the COTUS signed neither the Articles of Confederation, nor the Declaration of Independence, but was a signatory of the COTUS.

Although Hamilton is certainly considered one of the leaders of the creation of the COTUS, his first attempt at taxation led to the Whiskey Rebellion, which required mobilization of the Militia under George Washington to put it down.

Interestingly at the time of the creation of the COTUS, the Federal Government levied a tax against the states that was so unpopular it led to a rebellion. Indeed part of this unpopularity was because of the policy of assumption, the Federal Government assumed States debts that were run up during the revolutionary war, and needed to pay them off. In many of the Appalachian states there was minimal debt or they were debt free, and the unpopularity was they saw this as them paying off the debt of profligate states in the North East who's support the Federal Government had bought by assuming the debt.

The more things change... The more they stay the same...

You have misunderstood completely. I said nothing about coining money. Now if you believe that the Constitution forbids fractional reserve then by all means show me. If its true then we need to shut down the private banks because according to you bank credit violates the constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:38 PM
 
13,074 posts, read 6,891,740 times
Reputation: 2586
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
I wouldn't mistake you for a founder, even if I were high... but you don't need to be to think so. Comprehension MUST complement reading. Here is another opportunity, re-post:

Feel better now?


Only if with twisted idea of tyranny y'all have.

/sigh

do you understand the context of that quote?

why did Jefferson place such importance on education? Why was it key in many of his comments?

Here are some others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson to M. L'Hommande, 1787
The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801
What more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.

So tell me, how does that work in with your progressive movement? Do you not regulate our pursuits of industry and improvement? Do you not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned? Do you leave the citizens free, neither restraining them or aiding them in their pursuits?

According to Jefferson, your progressive beliefs are contrary to his statements. According to the important aspects of a good government, your position is a tyranny.

Last edited by Nomander; 11-14-2012 at 05:18 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:38 PM
 
12,660 posts, read 8,437,665 times
Reputation: 4743
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
That is utter nonsense, for if that were the case they would have stuck with the unworkable Articles of Constitution.

You get an F for 5th grade civics.
Fail thyself.


The Articles of Confederation

Last edited by gwynedd1; 11-14-2012 at 04:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:44 PM
 
Location: NC
10,009 posts, read 5,020,136 times
Reputation: 2999
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post
Is the US not violation of the the constitution ? Things like healthcare , social security , crime , businesses tax , drug laws so on not state matter?

No, health care, and social security fall under the general welfare provision, business taxes the 16th amendment (remember corporations are people), and drug laws are allowed as controls on interestate commerce.

I thought the founding fathers wanted the Feds to deal with trade ,immigrants and military defence only and things like abortion , LGBT , healthcare , social security and crime be state matter?

There were amendments made after the founders died you know. These amendments vastly increased federal power vis a vis the states. While social security is permissible under the welfare clause, most of the rest e.g. abortion are dependent on ideas about the amendments

But than would laws like healthcare , social security , drug laws , businesses tax and FDA be in violation of the constitution or what the founding fathers wanted?

No, the founders were smart enough to know that they could not suitably answer every Constitutional question that would come up, and that the country would change over time. That is why they created article 3 courts to handle questions of constitutional interpretation and allowed for the Amendment process.

What has happan to constitution than or has it been changed? Many states still have their own laws.Some states really tough on crime and other states bit softer on crime.
Its been well over 200 years things change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 06:26 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 799,723 times
Reputation: 263
Quote:
No, health care, and social security fall under the general welfare provision, business taxes the 16th amendment (remember corporations are people), and drug laws are allowed as controls on interestate commerce.





So than what happance if some states want that and other states do not want that than the feds rule over state right ? Would that not be in violation of the the constitution ?

I thought the founding fathers wanted state rights .


What right in the constitution allows the feds to tax the state and would this be in violation of the the constitution ? Did the founding fathers wanted the feds to tax each state?


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 06:55 PM
 
Location: NC
10,009 posts, read 5,020,136 times
Reputation: 2999
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweat209 View Post


So than what happance if some states want that and other states do not want that than the feds rule over state right ? Would that not be in violation of the the constitution ?

I thought the founding fathers wanted state rights .


What right in the constitution allows the feds to tax the state and would this be in violation of the the constitution ? Did the founding fathers wanted the feds to tax each state?


If the states don't like it, it is the states problem because of article 6, federal law is supreme if it has Constitutional basis, that is what the Constitution says so I don't see how it "would be in violation of the Constitution". I am quite sure some states don't like being covered under sec. 5 of the VRA, but that is their problem. States cannot overrule the feds using authorized constitutional power that is basically what the supremacy clause of the Constitution says and it was pretty much settled during the nullification crisis. As to where the power is in the Constitution for health care, that would be article 1 sect. 8.

Last edited by Randomstudent; 11-14-2012 at 07:05 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:19 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top