How do we measure the welfare of the US, not individuals?
GDP, debt service, military necessitated actions / war, monetary strength, etc.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How do we measure the welfare of the US, not individuals?
What role(s) should a government play in our lives?
The federal government's role is detailed in the enumerated powers of the Constitution. We don't bother with the law of the land much anymore, but that's the role the federal government SHOULD play, in my opinion as well as that of those that founded the country.
State and local governments are free to play any role they like as long as their involvement does not infringe upon any individual's rights. One of those rights includes the right to move to another state.
"...our rights come from nature and God, not from government."
Wrong.
Rights come from us, human beings. We created the concept, we define it.
where does the right to life for a tree or a rabbit come from......?
did the tree or the rabbit create the concept for themselves....or does it just exist in nature....?
All rights come from humans. They are something we thought up. Trees and rabbits have no need, awareness or any other connection to this human creation. Other life forms have all the rights we decide to attribute to them.
What role(s) should a government play in our lives?
The federal government's role is detailed in the enumerated powers of the Constitution. We don't bother with the law of the land much anymore, but that's the role the federal government SHOULD play, in my opinion as well as that of those that founded the country.
State and local governments are free to play any role they like as long as their involvement does not infringe upon any individual's rights. One of those rights includes the right to move to another state.
You can only speak for you, not the founding fathers. The argument over the General Welfare clause have been going on since the founder's days.
Alexander Hamilton argued for a broad interpretation which viewed spending as an enumerated power Congress could exercise independently to benefit the general welfare, such as to assist national needs in agriculture or education, provided that the spending is general in nature and does not favor any specific section of the country over any other.
Hamilton's view prevailed during the administrations of Presidents Washington and Adams.
wiki
Not sure if I see your logic. Taxes are a collective undertaking; agreed because it's done by a collection of people from a collection of people. But can't general welfare be the same? A collection of people spending taxes for the welfare of a collection of people?Interesting point, OODA. Are you arguing that the welfare of the US is divorced from the welfare of its citizens?
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
Taxes, duties, imposts, excises, paying debts and providing for the common Defence are collective undertakings, not individual.
^
speaks to founders on a regular basis
Webster's: "the state of doing well especially in respect to good fortune, happiness, well-being, or prosperity." Not sure about subsidies, but it seems that unemployment and the rest help people do well in respect to happiness, well-being, and/or prosperity.
Provide for the General Welfare of the United States.
Not indivduals.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
What about disaster relief? What about federal laws against murder, theft, kidnapping, etc? Can the fed gov't be said to be doing its job well if GDP is up but homelessness is the US is rampant?How do we measure the welfare of the US, not individuals?
GDP, debt service, military necessitated actions / war, monetary strength, etc.
I left that intentionally vague, as I'm hoping to learn more about theories and ideas than a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Perhaps another way to ask my question is, "What would the ideal government do?"How are you defining 'a government'. We have a Constitution that outlines the role of federal government. Anything else should be left to the states.
You could read Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution. That pretty much describes what the ideal government is supposed to do.
Not sure if I see your logic. Taxes are a collective undertaking; agreed because it's done by a collection of people from a collection of people. But can't general welfare be the same? A collection of people spending taxes for the welfare of a collection of people?
Which laws are those again? Which Democrats pushed for immigration limits, and similarly, which Republicans did not?In 1956 I escaped Hungary after the Revolution. My dream was to come to the United States, but due to the racist and xenophobic law by Democratic governments of the past,
I believe my signature points to where I stand on that issue.
It's not straightforward. The Constitution gives the Feds the power to promote the "general welfare".
What should that entail? Is there any limit to the amount the Feds can borrow under the enumerated powers? Regulating foreign trade--does that mean embargo, tariffs, and/or IP treaties?
Wow. I ask for your point of view and you respond by questioning my patriotism/nationalism. Way to represent conservatives!
i'll let you know when i take anyone here seriously
srsly
All rights come from humans. They are something we thought up. Trees and rabbits have no need, awareness or any other connection to this human creation. Other life forms have all the rights we decide to attribute to them.
All rights come from humans. They are something we thought up. Trees and rabbits have no need, awareness or any other connection to this human creation. Other life forms have all the rights we decide to attribute to them.
What a steaming pile.
Tell me, who on a deserted isle will stop one from heating their hut more than 68°?
Rights are inherent - rulers can only infringe, not grant, rights.
a tree has the inherent right to live and grow otherwise it would die....or never even come into being....
are you saying a human has less right than a tree......? that his right to life must depend upon the decision of another human being....?
This indicates a very strange understanding of the word 'right'. Capacity would be closer to what you are saying.
Only humans have rights, so of course a human cannot have fewer rights.