Home | Community | Message Board


Kratom Eye
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9  [ show all ]
OfflineDeepDish
journeyman
Registered: 01/14/02
Posts: 55
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1759007 - 07/29/03 09:17 AM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Just as in 1937 the Supreme Court ruled in favor of social security progams, in which judge Cazzaro stated,

"There have been statesman in our history who have stood for other views. . .We will not resurrect the contest. It is now settled by decision. The conception of the spending power advocated by Hamilton . . .has prevailed over that of Madison."

If you don't know already know the main dispute between Hamilton and Madison was what the statement "provide for the general welfare" really meant. Hamilton had a much more broad intepretation, beleiving that the government could increase taxationg and spending as long as it improved the welfare of the people, wheras Madison was more restricted in his view. This monumental court case, at least in the judges veiw at the time, proves that "provides for the general welfare" is the welfare of the people.

I find it interesting that you argue, in the same thread, against the constitutionality of welfare, and for that for the right to bear arms. While with the right to bear arms arguement you are well grounded, citing many cases and quotes, your welfare arguement consists of this. "I believe in the tenth amendment." You sound almost like some religous zealot who refuses to look at any intepretation of the consitition besides your own.
The Supreme Court has upheld both the right to bear arms and the ability of the government to impose social progams for our country's general welfare. Until you can get them to reinterpret the statement "provide for the general welfare" or Alex changes the 2nd amendment, you both should quit whining.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: DeepDish]
    #1759125 - 07/29/03 10:27 AM (17 years, 9 months ago)

I'll have to read the decision in that case. I'm unaware of it so thanks for pointing it out. Do you by chance know the specific case? who v. who?

However, while you may turn out to be correct in your interpretation of "provide for the general welfare" (which obviously I disagree with), the welfare of the people is not the same as the "welfare payments to the people." And yet even should your interpretation there prove to be correct, how would that mesh with the tenth amendment? Bear in mind the Bill of Rights sets out allowable actions for the Federal government and the tenth......
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. ......
speciffically prohibits the Feds from doing anything not set forth in the constitution. Last I looked, there was no mention of welfare payments in the constitution or the BOR.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 24 days
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: Phred]
    #1760099 - 07/29/03 05:58 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

pinky:
You certainly are enamored of the phrase "feigned obtuseness", aren't you?

I used it especially for you.  :smirk:

Nice quotes--I don't know who you're quoting...yourself?  Whoever it was Carbonhoots was quoting is just a matter of curiosity--I appreciated the way he said something.

If you consider our recent discussion, you might recall that I was trying to talk about possible NON-GOVERNMENTAL checks-and-balances in trade.  For instance I wrote about the connection between the consumer and the production method, wondering if a sense of accountability in purchasing would be effective.  Of course, that might be as quixotic as wondering about global Capitalism.

You didn't quite understand my position, but oh well.  I don't want to pull this thread off topic.  This thread is about welfare...and diamonds...and the right to bear arms... 


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: hongomon]
    #1760680 - 07/29/03 09:02 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

hongomon writes:

Nice quotes--I don't know who you're quoting...yourself?

Nope. Both are too concise to have been mine.

If you consider our recent discussion, you might recall that I was trying to talk about possible NON-GOVERNMENTAL checks-and-balances in trade.

As a Laissez-faire Capitalist, I have no objection to transactions carried out voluntarily.

For instance I wrote about the connection between the consumer and the production method, wondering if a sense of accountability in purchasing would be effective.

Depends which effect one wishes to accomplish, no?

This thread is about welfare...and diamonds...and the right to bear arms...

...and how with no poverty there would be no need for welfare... and if there were no excess labor pool leading potential employees to "underbid" each other there would be no poverty...

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 24 days
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: Phred]
    #1761165 - 07/29/03 11:26 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

pinky:
Nope. Both are too concise to have been mine.

Damn. I should have figured that out.

As a Laissez-faire Capitalist, I have no objection to transactions carried out voluntarily.

I tried to find that book I mentioned with the profits vs. voluntarism pair of essays (M. Friedman vs. Christopher D. Stone). It raises the issue of ethics of voluntary transactions by people in a fiduciary position, where the owners aren't on the same moral page. No final words coming from hongomon, it was a very interesting debate, compelling from both sides.

But beyond that, the cynic in me wants a mechanism, wants "check-and-balance forces" to help those voluntary transactions be more consistent and equitable.

hongomon: For instance I wrote about the connection between the consumer and the production method, wondering if a sense of accountability in purchasing would be effective.

pinky: Depends which effect one wishes to accomplish, no?

Perhaps. If one's desired effect is the realization of the kingdom of God on earth, it may not pan out (knock on wood). But what do consumer groups generally push for? I've been drinking "fair trade" coffee for the last six months--my hope is that the extra I pay is a reflection of a lower-level income increase. The "Rugmark" consumerism activism has routed oriental rug sales toward rugmakers who have proven themselves to embrace fair and legal labor practices.

...and how with no poverty there would be no need for welfare... and if there were no excess labor pool leading potential employees to "underbid" each other there would be no poverty...

Are you about to explain how Capitalism has the excess labor problem figured out? I'm all ears. And please--NO UTOPIANISM!


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: hongomon]
    #1762010 - 07/30/03 07:20 AM (17 years, 9 months ago)

hongomon writes:

But beyond that, the cynic in me wants a mechanism, wants "check-and-balance forces" to help those voluntary transactions be more consistent and equitable.

But it seems neither of us want that mechanism, those "check-and-balance forces", to be the State, right?

Are you about to explain how Capitalism has the excess labor problem figured out? I'm all ears.

I thought you were loathe to pull the thread further off-topic. If you wish to open a separate thread on the issue, I would be glad to comment on it.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 17 years, 24 days
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: Phred]
    #1762378 - 07/30/03 12:24 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

pinky:
But it seems neither of us want that mechanism, those "check-and-balance forces", to be the State, right?

Right. Barring any viable alternatives, however, I am more inclined than you to seek that mechanism in the State.

Myself aside, people will always turn to government to solve their problems, so it just seems like it would be in any small-government philosophy's best interest to explore ways to prevent and mitigate those problems--ways that aren't themselves anathema to the philosophy.

But yeah, look what I've done, I've pulled the thread by its earlobe again. Of course, we could focus on the surplus labor issue in the sense that it would nip the need for welfare in the bud, and that would be somewhat on topic. (Am I stretching?)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: hongomon]
    #1763118 - 07/30/03 04:59 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

hongomon writes:

Barring any viable alternatives, however, I am more inclined than you to seek that mechanism in the State.

You are of course aware that in this context, the State is force.

Look, if it were just you who held that inclination, I wouldn't care. Unfortunately, lots of people feel the same way you do. And that's the problem with any democracy which doesn't have cast-in-stone regulations specifying what government is permitted to do and (much more importantly) must not under any circumstances be permitted to do.

I have noted here before several times that despite the undeniable genius of the Founding Fathers, not all of them were prescient. Because of this lack of ability to foretell the future with pinpoint accuracy, they allowed two fatal flaws to undermine their handiwork -- they gave the federal government the right to mint currency and the right to regulate interstate commerce. To be fair, no human being could possibly have foreseen the incredible twisting, stretching, distorting, and "square peg forced into a round hole"-ing that future politicians would abuse the interstate commerce clause with.

Far too many American politicians fall into the most dangerous trap in government service -- they start to think their wishes to make the country a "better place" supersede the principles under which their government is supposed to operate. The irony is that most of their constituents see nothing wrong with this. Although constituent Smith and constituent Jones may disagree on which "problem" is the most pressing, neither ever gives a thought to the fact that what they want the government to do is forbidden by its charter.

Myself aside, people will always turn to government to solve their problems...

See above. Nowhere in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence or the voluminous supporting commentary by the Founding Fathers (i.e. the Federalist Papers) will you find the words "solve" or "problem". The government of the United States was not created to solve problems. It was created to protect the rights of the individuals residing in the United States. Period.

...so it just seems like it would be in any small-government philosophy's best interest to explore ways to prevent and mitigate those problems--ways that aren't themselves anathema to the philosophy.

Those ways have been explored, in great detail. And the conclusion in each case boils down to the same thing -- if the problem is in fact a serious one, people of good will acting freely will sooner or later address it. As soon as you resort to the use of force to solve one "problem", there is quite literally no defensible way to argue that the use of force should not be applied to ALL "problems". To their credit, the Founding Fathers understood this. Too bad so many Americans alive today don't.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: hongomon]
    #1763126 - 07/30/03 05:02 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

hongomon writes:

But yeah, look what I've done, I've pulled the thread by its earlobe again. Of course, we could focus on the surplus labor issue in the sense that it would nip the need for welfare in the bud, and that would be somewhat on topic. (Am I stretching?)

In my opinion, yeah, it is a stretch. Why not open a separate thread on the topic? It's just as easy to hit the "new post" button as it is to hit the "reply" button.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1763203 - 07/30/03 05:29 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
I'll have to read the decision in that case. I'm unaware of it so thanks for pointing it out. Do you by chance know the specific case? who v. who?


Try this link. It does a good job explaining the debate on this issue, and the Supreme Court cases related to it. A lot of the same arguments we already made are covered in the link. As you know, the constitution gives the Supreme Court the final power to interpret the constitution, and the link shows they ruled in favor of welfare.

Note that I quoted Hamilton when I read the Federalist Papers (yes, very dry reading). But Madison had an opposing view, and the Supreme Court had to decide whose view to use:

"A Dispute Among the Founders-

The constitutional issue about the taxing power had deep roots running all the way back to the founders and to a dispute between Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. Although both Hamilton and Madison were Federalists who believed in a strong federal government, they disagreed over the interpretation of the Constitution's permission for the government to levy taxes and spend money to "provide for the general welfare." Hamilton thought this meant that government could levy new taxes and undertake new spending if doing so improved the general welfare in a broad sense. Madison thought the federal government could only expend money for purposes specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

The Madisonian view, also shared by Thomas Jefferson, came in time to be known as the strict construction doctrine while the Hamiltonian view is called the doctrine of implied powers.

The balance between these two philosophies went one way and then the other over the years, with Hamilton's view tending to prevail over the long run, but it was always possible that in uncharted waters the courts might retreat to a Madisonian conservatism, and the Supreme Court of the early New Deal era was highly conservative in outlook."

Nevertheless, the Hamiltonian interpretation still won out.


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: DeepDish]
    #1763213 - 07/30/03 05:31 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

By the way, excellent post DeepDish!!!  :thumbup: :laugh: 


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: Cornholio]
    #1763436 - 07/30/03 06:23 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Well shit. I guess when I bitch about SS, I'll have to say it's unconstitutional IN MY OPINION.

Since no-one has come up with the same type of link for welfare, I'll stick with the unconstitutional slant. (you didn't think I'd give up that easy did you?  :lol: )

Considering the times when this decision was made I guess that even though I think it was the wrong decision, it at least is semi-understandable.

Time for many more letters to my reps.

While you guys came through with the proof, I still don't have to like it.

Kudo's to you both.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1763529 - 07/30/03 06:58 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Well shit. I guess when I bitch about SS, I'll have to say it's unconstitutional IN MY OPINION.

While you guys came through with the proof, I still don't have to like it.

Kudo's to you both.


Wow, that's a very uncharacteristic response for you lds. I'm impressed!


--------------------


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: Cornholio]
    #1763557 - 07/30/03 07:07 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Wow, that's a very uncharacteristic response for you lds. I'm impressed! 



When someone can demonstrate to me to MY satisfaction that I was  wr....  wr.... wr.... incorrect, I can admit it.

You and deepdish came through with the facts and you backed them up with the link.

And while I disagree with the courts decision, there was indeed a decision.

Anyway, it's a good thing this doesn't happen often!  :wink:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblewingnutx

Registered: 09/25/00
Posts: 2,282
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1763572 - 07/30/03 07:11 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

I was wr.... wr.... wr....




Way to go, Fonzie.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: wingnutx]
    #1763579 - 07/30/03 07:13 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

wingnutx said:
Quote:

I was wr.... wr.... wr....




Way to go, Fonzie.



I've never watched that show. I take it I inadvertently used his line?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblewingnutx

Registered: 09/25/00
Posts: 2,282
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1763591 - 07/30/03 07:16 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

Yeah, he can't say he was wrong. You got him almost verbatim, if I remember correctly after 20 years.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: A few "welfare" myths [Re: wingnutx]
    #1763598 - 07/30/03 07:19 PM (17 years, 9 months ago)

I can say it, and have done so on this site.... but what fun would that be?

I make it a habit to never watch a show with either Winkler or Opie in it. There's just something about those two.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Exploding the left’s red state myths
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Echro 3,989 65 02/16/14 04:23 AM
by starfire_xes
* myth of the media
( 1 2 3 all )
phi1618 3,785 55 04/29/04 07:31 PM
by DigitalDuality
* General Welfare
( 1 2 3 all )
luvdemshrooms 2,413 45 12/14/03 05:37 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* The Twelve Myths of Hunger
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
silversoul7 9,358 117 10/21/05 11:48 PM
by Unagipie
* Pure Capitalism
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Lallafa 9,877 76 12/26/01 01:30 AM
by Phred
* The Myth of the Kerry Calamity Evolving 319 0 10/27/04 10:03 PM
by Evolving
* Welfare to Workfare
( 1 2 3 all )
lysergic 2,969 58 10/21/03 01:07 PM
by Rono
* Welfare in tribal societies
( 1 2 all )
somebodyelse 4,050 36 06/27/03 04:35 PM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
10,989 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 26 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Out-Grow.com - Mushroom Growing Kits & Supplies
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 14 queries.