rhaig 0
Recommended Posts
kallend 2,150
QuoteQuote
Another gun thread to help kalled keep up his gun post count
He's too busy blathering on and diluting whatever useful content he produces with the noise he's providing. It's done nothing but marginalize and discredit him.
But he sure is good at it.
Still smarting because I called out your strawman in the "gun confiscation" thread?
Or because I pointed out that you included yourself in the set of "nimwits" in this thread?
Or because your confusion of climate with weather was highlighted in the "Warm" thread?
For a guy in a glass house you sure have a strange hobby of throwing stones.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
rhaig 0
and the signal to noise ratio gets smaller still.
--
Rob
Rob
Quote
''what is better for society as a whole.''
Our Constitution enshrines the individual pursuit, not what is best for society. Society is best served by individuals pursuing their own self interest in a civilized manner. Not by elected people telling them how to live their lives/what's best for society.
We are all engines of karma
billvon 3,120
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Our Constitution enshrines the individual pursuit, not what is best for society.
It enshrines both. "Promote the general welfare." "Congress shall provide for the general welfare of the United States." It recognizes that both individual rights and the general welfare of society are important.
It enshrines both. "Promote the general welfare." "Congress shall provide for the general welfare of the United States." It recognizes that both individual rights and the general welfare of society are important.
rushmc 23
Quote>Our Constitution enshrines the individual pursuit, not what is best for society.
It enshrines both. "Promote the general welfare." "Congress shall provide for the general welfare of the United States." It recognizes that both individual rights and the general welfare of society are important.
I feel that the general welfare is best served by an independant productive individual
An individual cared for by the state does NOT promote general welfare
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
Andy9o8 2
QuoteQuote
''what is better for society as a whole.''
Our Constitution enshrines the individual pursuit, not what is best for society.
It does both, specifically referring to "the general welfare" in both the preamble and in Article 1, Section 8.
billvon 3,120
>I feel that the general welfare is best served by an independant productive individual
That's fine. Not what the Constitution says, but that's certainly one way to interpret it.
That's fine. Not what the Constitution says, but that's certainly one way to interpret it.
kallend 2,150
Quoteand the signal to noise ratio gets smaller still.
Well, stop posting if your posts annoy you.
At least rushmc is amusing and doesn't get annoyed.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote
It does both, specifically referring to "the general welfare" in both the preamble and in Article 1, Section 8.
How is providing for an individual who doesn't want to work (and there's a lot of them today) providing for the "general welfare"? Yes, that's a strong statement, but let's keep things simple for the purposes of this discussion
We are all engines of karma
billvon 3,120
>How is providing for an individual who doesn't want to work (and there's a lot of them
>today) providing for the "general welfare"?
It keeps them from starving to death. Keeping someone alive is promoting their welfare; doing it for anyone in that state promotes the general welfare.
>today) providing for the "general welfare"?
It keeps them from starving to death. Keeping someone alive is promoting their welfare; doing it for anyone in that state promotes the general welfare.
Andy9o8 2
QuoteQuote
It does both, specifically referring to "the general welfare" in both the preamble and in Article 1, Section 8.
How is providing for an individual who doesn't want to work (and there's a lot of them today) providing for the "general welfare"? Yes, that's a strong statement, but let's keep things simple for the purposes of this discussion
I was speaking only in the narrow context that you seemed to be: the Constitution.
[insert generic joke here about "welfare"]
Quote
It keeps them from starving to death. Keeping someone alive is promoting their welfare; doing it for anyone in that state promotes the general welfare.
This we can agree on.
I'm sure you've at least seen, and knowing you probably even read, articles about the USA's poor people. Those folks with air conditioning, flat screen TVs, and cars (that they don't use to drive to work). These are the folks I'm speaking of. Clearly, they aren't starving to death. Is this promoting the general welfare?
We are all engines of karma
billvon 3,120
>I'm sure you've at least seen, and knowing you probably even read, articles about the
>USA's poor people. Those folks with air conditioning, flat screen TVs, and cars (that
>they don't use to drive to work). These are the folks I'm speaking of. Clearly, they
>aren't starving to death. Is this promoting the general welfare?
Literally yes (they are better off) but it's also a very poor use of the money intended to keep people from starving. Fortunately such people are in a very, very small minority, although making that number zero would be a good thing.
>USA's poor people. Those folks with air conditioning, flat screen TVs, and cars (that
>they don't use to drive to work). These are the folks I'm speaking of. Clearly, they
>aren't starving to death. Is this promoting the general welfare?
Literally yes (they are better off) but it's also a very poor use of the money intended to keep people from starving. Fortunately such people are in a very, very small minority, although making that number zero would be a good thing.
rushmc 23
Quote>How is providing for an individual who doesn't want to work (and there's a lot of them
>today) providing for the "general welfare"?
It keeps them from starving to death. Keeping someone alive is promoting their welfare; doing it for anyone in that state promotes the general welfare.
But now you are talking about the individual
ABTW, I dont think that is what the general welfare part means
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
Quote>I'm sure you've at least seen, and knowing you probably even read, articles about the
>USA's poor people. Those folks with air conditioning, flat screen TVs, and cars (that
>they don't use to drive to work). These are the folks I'm speaking of. Clearly, they
>aren't starving to death. Is this promoting the general welfare?
Literally yes (they are better off) but it's also a very poor use of the money intended to keep people from starving. Fortunately such people are in a very, very small minority, although making that number zero would be a good thing.
Again, as an indidvidual they are better off
However, them being better off does not provide for the general welfare
It provides for what are now called entitlements
You know, just welfare
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 3,120
>However, them being better off does not provide for the general welfare
Providing a service that's available to one person provides for individual welfare.
Providing a service that's available for everyone provides for the general welfare.
Even you could use these services if someday you needed them.
Providing a service that's available to one person provides for individual welfare.
Providing a service that's available for everyone provides for the general welfare.
Even you could use these services if someday you needed them.
rushmc 23
Quote>However, them being better off does not provide for the general welfare
Providing a service that's available to one person provides for individual welfare.
Providing a service that's available for everyone provides for the general welfare.
Even you could use these services if someday you needed them.
You are talking about those who NEED a safety net
I am for that too
Unfortunatly we have gone way beyond that. To apoint where it hurts the "general wellfare" as meant in the Constitution
They big winners are the congress critters and their buddies
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
kallend 2,150
QuoteQuote>However, them being better off does not provide for the general welfare
Providing a service that's available to one person provides for individual welfare.
Providing a service that's available for everyone provides for the general welfare.
Even you could use these services if someday you needed them.
You are talking about those who NEED a safety net
I am for that too
Unfortunatly we have gone way beyond that. To apoint where it hurts the "general wellfare" as meant in the Constitution
They big winners are the congress critters and their buddies
What would you cut out?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteQuote>However, them being better off does not provide for the general welfare
Providing a service that's available to one person provides for individual welfare.
Providing a service that's available for everyone provides for the general welfare.
Even you could use these services if someday you needed them.
You are talking about those who NEED a safety net
I am for that too
Unfortunatly we have gone way beyond that. To apoint where it hurts the "general wellfare" as meant in the Constitution
They big winners are the congress critters and their buddies
What would you cut out?
Could start by cutting unemployment back to say, 16 weeks
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 3,120
>You are talking about those who NEED a safety net . . . I am for that too
Agreed! Although the system is sometimes abused it functions fairly well for people who need it.
>Unfortunatly we have gone way beyond that. To apoint where it hurts the
>"general wellfare" as meant in the Constitution
What would be an example of that?
Agreed! Although the system is sometimes abused it functions fairly well for people who need it.
>Unfortunatly we have gone way beyond that. To apoint where it hurts the
>"general wellfare" as meant in the Constitution
What would be an example of that?
He's too busy blathering on and diluting whatever useful content he produces with the noise he's providing. It's done nothing but marginalize and discredit him.
But he sure is good at it.
Rob
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites