SmarterthanYou
rebel
again, read my sig
Did You Ever See Batshit Crazy?
- Thread starter Howey
- Start date
I'm Watermark
Diabetic
Well, the constitution does allow for the funding of social programs; aside from that, nothing they wrote has any bearing on my stance.
Also, it's not merely the stress, but the efficiency. The private sector operates for profit, meanwhile government operates for the welfare of the people.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
By "for the welfare of the people", did you mean "by how many low level bureaucrats they can employ"?
Oh yeah. About your sig. That's obselete as of 1936. Try again.
I'm Watermark
Diabetic
No, I did not. I don't care how clever you find yourself, as you're still unable to prove me wrong on any count.
christiefan915
Catalyst
8,775 Firearm Murders a Year in US, Equiv. of 290 in UK
Posted on 01/10/2013 by Juan
Updated. 2013 Reprint edn.
Number of Murders, United States, 2010: 12,996
Number of Murders by Firearms, US, 2010: 8,775
Number of Murders, Britain, 2011*: 638
(Since Britain’s population is 1/5 that of US, this is equivalent to 3,095 US murders)
Number of Murders by firearms, Britain, 2011*: 58
(equivalent to 290 US murders)
Number of Murders by crossbow in Britain, 2011*: 2 (equivalent to 10 US murders).
For more on murder by firearms in Britain, see the BBC.
The international comparisons show conclusively that fewer gun owners among civilians per capita produce not only fewer murders by firearm, but fewer murders per capita over all.
http://www.juancole.com/2013/01/firearm-murders-equiv.html
SmarterthanYou
rebel
what article of the constitution allows for funding social programs? and given that the US is responsible for 25% of the worlds prison pop., how is that operating for the welfare of its people? how is bailing out 'too big to fail' the welfare of the people?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
list the case that over rules it?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
whats the over all crime rate?
apple0154
MEOW
Exactly! And that's precisely what Obama and ObamaCare is all about. The Federal Government is not planning on providing hospitals but it can promote better access to them by devising ways for people to get insurance. The Federal Government is not going to go into the business of manufacturing pills/medication but it can promote the availability of them by negotiating prices on behalf of the citizens.
Then there's "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." Promote the blessings of liberty? Provide the blessings of liberty? Help people obtain the blessings of liberty? It seems some people interpret the Preamble to say, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, will do nothing and let the free market handle it."
Promote: to help or encourage to exist or flourish
That means doing something. That means the government is tasked with doing.
apple0154
MEOW
"The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution's fundamental purposes and guiding principles. It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve."
SmarterthanYou
rebel
in the days of king george, he would impose higher taxes on those subjects who wouldn't 'go along to get along'. much like imposing sanctions on another country to persuade that government to behave a certain way. note that these taxes never hurt the rich and powerful, only the commoners. So the framers tasked the feds with securing the blessings of librty by regulating commerce to keep things fair for all and not to strongarm to benefit one group over the other. obamacare is nothing more than the feds implying sanctions.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
but has no substantive power to do such.
apple0154
MEOW
The citizens in every country with government health care pay less than in the US. No exception so to call it implying sanctions doesn't make any sense. I suppose we could say government health care is the opposite of sanctions.
I already have. Please pay attention.
apple0154
MEOW
(Excerpt) The courts have shown interest in any clues they can find in the Preamble regarding the Constitution's meaning. Courts have developed several techniques for interpreting the meaning of statutes and these are also used to interpret the Constitution. As a result, the courts have said that interpretive techniques that focus on the exact text of a document should be used in interpreting the meaning of the Constitution, so the Preamble provides additional language against which to compare other parts of the Constitution. Balanced against these techniques are those that focus more attention on broader efforts to discern the meaning of the document from more than just the wording; the Preamble is also useful for these efforts to identify the "spirit" of the Constitution. (Packet Co. v. Keokuk, 95 U.S. 80, 87 (1877) ("A mere adherence to the letter [of the Constitution], without reference to the spirit and purpose, may [sometimes] mislead."). (End)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The "power" of the Preamble is in it's use in interpreting the Constitution. It does not give the government additional powers, per se, but it can enlarge current powers or include additional things under which the government has jurisdiction depending on interpretation.
Take the Commerce Clause, for example. There are specific things the government has the power to classify/control under the Commerce Clause. As society progresses additional things fall under the Commerce Clause. While that doesn't give the government an additional power (it all has to do with the Commerce Clause) it does mean the government has power over a specific "thing" which it didn't have before because that specific "thing" wasn't around before.
That is my point regarding ObamaCare. What could have been mentioned in the Constitution regarding health care? There was no such thing as "health care" circa 1776. However, today, a person's health is considered because we have ways to deal with it and we consider a person's health important. If the intention of the Founding Fathers was to found a country that benefited the citizens as much as possible and health care was available at today's level does it make sense to conclude they wouldn't have considered it? Are we to suppose they would have just let the citizens die?
What was/is the "spirit" of the Constitution?
007
New member
Too late. You got a health care system and it's going to become more and more government controlled so live with it. Your way, "pay or suffer", is slowly going into the trash can of history. You are going to help your fellow citizen whether you like it or not. Get used to it.
Now go to your room until you can act like an adult!
Can't stop with your vicious attacks, I have repeatedly told you thst my mother died a little over 10 years ago but you keep rubbing it in.
If this punish the motivated and reward the lazy attitude prevails, what happens to the pioneering spirit?
Dynamism? Where is the motivation to get ahead?
When sitting back and refusing to do anything gets you the big payoff?
007
New member
The spirit of the constitution was to keep forign enemies out of US affairs.
Kindly stfu and respect our constitution.
007
New member
You get what you pay for.
We get DRs and patients making decisions, you get politicians.
007
New member
So why did murders, gun crime, police getting shot and all other violent crime in the UK increase after 1998?
Why does Chicago have the strictest gun laws and the highest murder rate?
You and your Brady Bull!
Couldn't run a Facebook page!