Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Who was originally put in charge of wealth redistribution?
The Towns/Communities 0 0%
The States 0 0%
The Federal/Central Government 3 18.75%
The Individual Citizens 13 81.25%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-12-2011, 09:29 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,751,765 times
Reputation: 18521

Advertisements

When our nation was established and the Constitution was drawn up, who was put in charge of distributing the wealth of the nation, how they saw fit?



The People?

The Central Government?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2011, 09:39 PM
 
4,568 posts, read 4,116,554 times
Reputation: 2297
The rich elitists that wrote the constitution to begin with.

Lets not forget: property owning white men were the only eligible voters for how long??????

The revolution was all about taking control from the rich elitists in England and giving it to the rich elitists in the colonies. Pretty much the same pervasive greed that currently runs our country now.

There are some major differences between now and then though. There was cheap available land, all you had to do was move west. Education was minimal so advancement was more easily achieved. People could advance based on their own merits. Not so anymore. People are not able to advance because of the overpriced cost of living, in combination with the duration of time required to gain "skills", class mobility in this country is getting to a standstill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2011, 09:42 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,412,951 times
Reputation: 3086
The Federal Government. At the time the wealth of our nation was our vast lands and untapped natural resources. The Federal Government was given all the territory west of the Appalachians and beyond to distribute for settlement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2011, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,337,703 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent View Post
The Federal Government. At the time the wealth of our nation was our vast lands and untapped natural resources. The Federal Government was given all the territory west of the Appalachians and beyond to distribute for settlement.
How much did they charge for all that land and all those natural resources back then? Today the federal government still owns way too much land and they are not bashful about stopping any use of the resources on those lands. Nice try, but all I see in your post is a purely left leaner making noise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2011, 10:05 PM
 
12,772 posts, read 8,002,024 times
Reputation: 4332
Quote:
Originally Posted by odinloki1 View Post
People could advance based on their own merits. Not so anymore. People are not able to advance because of the overpriced cost of living, in combination with the duration of time required to gain "skills", class mobility in this country is getting to a standstill.
-People no longer advance on their own merits?
-The cost of living and getting experience keep people from advancing?

What percentage of the country do you think this is true for?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2011, 10:10 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,412,951 times
Reputation: 3086
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
How much did they charge for all that land and all those natural resources back then? Today the federal government still owns way too much land and they are not bashful about stopping any use of the resources on those lands. Nice try, but all I see in your post is a purely left leaner making noise.
Negligible, often it was just the cost of the survey. Just google land patents, this system was streamlined with the preemption act of 1841 which sold land for about $1.25 an acre and the homestead acts of 1862 which stated if you homestead a plot of land and made improvements you could get the deed for the title fee about 10% of the total land of the US was given away this way from 1862-1934. Even more of it was given to railroads by the federal government and the federal government as you say still owns much of it.

The fact of the matter is, and I know facts tend to be left leaning, the federal government was in fact given the wealth of America in the form of its vast interior to be distributed by federal government at the time of the Constitution though back then it started out just with the land up to the Mississippi.

Last edited by Randomstudent; 09-12-2011 at 10:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2011, 10:20 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,408,969 times
Reputation: 11539
My guess would be the churches.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 09:56 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,751,765 times
Reputation: 18521
Why does the government feel they can do a better job, unless they use it to buy votes and fill the pockets of their buddies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,337,703 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Why does the government feel they can do a better job, unless they use it to buy votes and fill the pockets of their buddies.
Great and so true statement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:33 PM
 
Location: KS
145 posts, read 610,492 times
Reputation: 96
It is the nature of our desires to be boundless, and many live only to gratify them. But for this purpose the first object is, not so much to establish an equality of fortune, as to prevent those who are of a good disposition from desiring more than their own, and those who are of a bad one from being able to acquire it; and this may be done if they are kept in an inferior station, and not exposed to injustice. - Aristotle


something everyone needs to understand when it comes to corporate welfare and welfare abusers/cheaters... "as to prevent those who are of a good disposition from desiring more than their own, and those who are of a bad one(disposition) from being able to acquire it" this is why we need the government to mandate...the nature of our desires is boundless, evil abounds on both ends.. it is the middle that is needed to keep the balance.
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 $104,000 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.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top