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.
It is one of the few federal spending items that is constitutionally mandated. Most other things are nice to haves.
The rest are interests in the government to keep the nation healthy and competitive as a whole. However, just because something is specifically listed in the constitution doesn't mean we need to go overboard in its spending, in my opinion.
Also, I'd like to add that key infrastructure specifically listed in the US constitution is now being paid for by states and local governments. Go figure.
The rest are interests in the government to keep the nation healthy and competitive as a whole. However, just because something is specifically listed in the constitution doesn't mean we need to go overboard in its spending, in my opinion.
I agree, and we are not going overboard on defense of our nation. Cutting edge RD to stay ahead of the pack costs money. Not to mention the public benefits from such research over the years.
The Feds just take tax money then give it back to the states to pay for roads and the such. States actually abuse the system more than anything by claiming freeways are interstate to gets fed money when the freeways don't actually connect to other states.
I agree, and we are not going overboard on defense of our nation. Cutting edge RD to stay ahead of the pack costs money. Not to mention the public benefits from such research over the years.
The Feds just take tax money then give it back to the states to pay for roads and the such. States actually abuse the system more than anything by claiming freeways are interstate to gets fed money when the freeways don't actually connect to other states.
Intrastate highways relieve congestion, which in turn allow for faster communication (postal clause) and commerce between states. Also, most interstate highways (if not all) built are now being paid by a 65 - 35% match. Why can't the feds spend more on infrastructure?
It's just free food.
It's just a free place for them to live.
It's just free healthcare.
It's just welfare.
It's just a free phone.
It's just free college.
It's just free internet.
It's just some disaster relief money.
The list just goes on and on. They just don't seem to realize that all these "benefits" add up to huge burdens. Maybe they would have more of an appreciation for it if they saw the government skimming 40% off of the top of every paycheck like I do.
No they don't think logically or rationally, they run on pure emotions.
"Wouldn't it be wonderful if...." and that is as far as their train of rational thought goes. We were running $1.2 trillion deficits, and the dems were still trying to add more free stuff for social welfare programs and other give-aways from the US Treasury.
We cannot just keep giving away our children's future just to make life temporarily easier for ourselves today.
We need to sort out those federal and state welfare assistance programs that we NEED, and broom the rest.
We take care of the sick, the hungry, the homeless, and those people who are truly in need, and broom the crap like giving away millions of taxpayer dollars, because "gee wouldn't it be nice if more people bought a Chevy Volt."
If you're advocating letting children go hungry for their parents' irresponsibility, I hope you're willing to pay extra healthcare costs for the health problems their malnutrition would cause. I hope you have a strong enough stomach to see stunted and emaciated kids begging on the street, and I hope you have the fortitude to turn a 6 year old girl away and tell her to get a job when she begs and cries to you for a bite to eat.
In my perfect world the church that teaches birth control is a sin could pick up the tab for tending to all these little gifts from G-d.
Intrastate highways relieve congestion, which in turn allow for faster communication (postal clause) and commerce between states. Also, most interstate highways (if not all) built are now being paid by a 65 - 35% match. Why can't the feds spend more on infrastructure?
Because they are busy spending on non constitutionally mandate things.
Well maybe if the private sector offered a comfortable living condition like the past, we wouldn't be looking to the government to do something about how difficult it is becoming to make ends meet in the USA.
I agree it's not the governments place to provide much of this stuff to most people. I think it's in the best interest of this nation, however, to have the best quality of life we can - and to foster a private sector which can provide that.
So why aren't liberals creating private sector jobs that offer a comfortable living condition? Could it be that the only way they can offer anything is through the threat of government force?
How much of YOUR paycheck do you give back to the government, you clearly don't deserve more than anyone else, right? So you should be donating every penny above your minimum basic needs to someone else. Put YOUR money where your mouth is instead of spending someone elses for a change.
In my perfect world the church that teaches birth control is a sin could pick up the tab for tending to all these little gifts from G-d.
In a perfect world the person having the child would pick up the tab for their own damn children.
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.
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.
