If We Followed the US Constitution Would We Be in this Position?

OK, so let me get this right you believe that the US taxpayer is not going to pay for other people's mortgages... Is that correct? Because I believe they are... Being that the government doesn't actually earn money, in your opinion where is the money going to come from?

Actually, at the moment; China or whoever is buying up our debt is.

Eventually we'll be paying back all that debt (or we invade them and it goes clean) and that will be included.

However, you haven't answered my question; where in the Constitution does it say the Government can't do that?


Right here... The constitution says what the government can do, not what it can't do....

Section. 8. 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;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; — And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
 
OK, so let me get this right you believe that the US taxpayer is not going to pay for other people's mortgages... Is that correct? Because I believe they are... Being that the government doesn't actually earn money, in your opinion where is the money going to come from?

However, you haven't answered my question; where in the Constitution does it say the Government can't do that?

That's not how the Constitution works. The Constitution gives specific powers to the federal government, and anything not mentioned in the Constitution is not a power that the federal government has.
 
If we stuck to the US Constitution would our economy be in this position right now?

What do you think?
At the moment we are following the constitution. It's debatable if our previous president did, however, when he invaded a country for reasons that had nothing to do with the "providing for the common defence."
 
OK, so let me get this right you believe that the US taxpayer is not going to pay for other people's mortgages... Is that correct? Because I believe they are... Being that the government doesn't actually earn money, in your opinion where is the money going to come from?

However, you haven't answered my question; where in the Constitution does it say the Government can't do that?

That's not how the Constitution works. The Constitution gives specific powers to the federal government, and anything not mentioned in the Constitution is not a power that the federal government has.
Domestic tranquility and general welfare are broad enough in scope to mean the government can do almost anything in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.
 
However, you haven't answered my question; where in the Constitution does it say the Government can't do that?

That's not how the Constitution works. The Constitution gives specific powers to the federal government, and anything not mentioned in the Constitution is not a power that the federal government has.
Domestic tranquility and general welfare are broad enough in scope to mean the government can do almost anything in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.

If the government can do anything it wants then the Constitution was unnecessary from the very beginning.

But this is not the case.
 
I love how people talk alot about the economic situation when they dont have a country on their back asking for help. I would love to see any of you get elected talking like you are now I put money on it you would lose, people are asking for help and everyone who still has a job is whining about the people who need help getting it. I would love to see if you guys lose your jobs go to unemployement and wow there is no money for you. If you have a family and bills what do you do. Have you ever had to decide between needs food or rent or electricity for some of you i bet not and its even worse when you dont have kids.

Now for the consitution lets see without this government running debt the advanced military alot of you guys talk about would not be so advanced why because it costs too much. Support for people who are retired now thats automatic they put in the work they deserve to retire and live the rest of their lives without alot of cares they already have enough as it is.

So what you guys think now our debt is because when we would have been saving we were spending and when we need to spend there is no savings to pull from Boom or Bust just like what the Gov. Sanford of SC blamed his GOP State house and Senate for doing.
 
I love how people talk alot about the economic situation when they dont have a country on their back asking for help. I would love to see any of you get elected talking like you are now I put money on it you would lose, people are asking for help and everyone who still has a job is whining about the people who need help getting it. I would love to see if you guys lose your jobs go to unemployement and wow there is no money for you. If you have a family and bills what do you do. Have you ever had to decide between needs food or rent or electricity for some of you i bet not and its even worse when you dont have kids.

Now for the consitution lets see without this government running debt the advanced military alot of you guys talk about would not be so advanced why because it costs too much. Support for people who are retired now thats automatic they put in the work they deserve to retire and live the rest of their lives without alot of cares they already have enough as it is.

So what you guys think now our debt is because when we would have been saving we were spending and when we need to spend there is no savings to pull from Boom or Bust just like what the Gov. Sanford of SC blamed his GOP State house and Senate for doing.

The problem is that this economic crisis was caused by the federal government and the Federal Reserve, and now people expect them to get us out of this recession the same way they got us into it. It makes no sense.
 
That's not how the Constitution works. The Constitution gives specific powers to the federal government, and anything not mentioned in the Constitution is not a power that the federal government has.
Domestic tranquility and general welfare are broad enough in scope to mean the government can do almost anything in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.

If the government can do anything it wants then the Constitution was unnecessary from the very beginning.

But this is not the case.
You missed this part of my comment: in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.

Even that brings dangers, because the government can create an artificial emergency. But that's why we have elections, we get to decide ultimately if the government acted correctly.
 
Domestic tranquility and general welfare are broad enough in scope to mean the government can do almost anything in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.

If the government can do anything it wants then the Constitution was unnecessary from the very beginning.

But this is not the case.
You missed this part of my comment: in times of emergency, except for something that is specifically listed as unconstitutional.

Even that brings dangers, because the government can create an artificial emergency. But that's why we have elections, we get to decide ultimately if the government acted correctly.

Where does the Constitution state that there is such a thing as "emergency powers" that allow the President or Congress to do whatever they want?
 
Last edited:
If we stuck to the US Constitution would our economy be in this position right now?

What do you think?
At the moment we are following the constitution. It's debatable if our previous president did, however, when he invaded a country for reasons that had nothing to do with the "providing for the common defence."

didn't obama just act unilatterally and send 17,000 troops to re-invade afganistan without un or congressional or world approval.....
 
If we stuck to the US Constitution would our economy be in this position right now?

What do you think?
At the moment we are following the constitution. It's debatable if our previous president did, however, when he invaded a country for reasons that had nothing to do with the "providing for the common defence."

didn't obama just act unilatterally and send 17,000 troops to re-invade afganistan without un or congressional or world approval.....
On going war left over from previous administration.
 
At the moment we are following the constitution. It's debatable if our previous president did, however, when he invaded a country for reasons that had nothing to do with the "providing for the common defence."

didn't obama just act unilatterally and send 17,000 troops to re-invade afganistan without un or congressional or world approval.....
On going war left over from previous administration.

like bush chasing osama into afganistan because clinton didn't do anything the 5 times we were attacked by osama...on going like that.....
 
didn't obama just act unilatterally and send 17,000 troops to re-invade afganistan without un or congressional or world approval.....
On going war left over from previous administration.

like bush chasing osama into afganistan because clinton didn't do anything the 5 times we were attacked by osama...on going like that.....

not quite. though it makes for a good bedtime story for right wing kiddies. ;)

Unable to persuade the Saudis to accept bin Laden, and lacking a case to indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture.

*snip*

Clinton administration officials maintain emphatically that they had no such option in 1996. In the legal, political and intelligence environment of the time, they said, there was no choice but to allow bin Laden to depart Sudan unmolested.

"The FBI did not believe we had enough evidence to indict bin Laden at that time, and therefore opposed bringing him to the United States," said Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, who was deputy national security adviser then.

U.S. Was Foiled Multiple Times in Efforts To Capture Bin Laden or Have Him Killed (washingtonpost.com)
 
Is taking money from a group of people and paying for other's mortgages in the constitution? Please show me where. Thanks.

It's not in the constitution to take money from the taxpayers and give it to the bankers or corporations either yet much much more of our money goes to them than to any middle or lower class mortgage holder.
 
didn't obama just act unilatterally and send 17,000 troops to re-invade afganistan without un or congressional or world approval.....
On going war left over from previous administration.

like bush chasing osama into afganistan because clinton didn't do anything the 5 times we were attacked by osama...on going like that.....
Not true, but it is so far off topic that I'll let it slide.
 
btw, manu...attacking Afghanistan, since bin laden was there, was providing for the common defense. Not so in the case of attacking Iraq.
 
you'd have to ask the idiot who was the first leader in history to cut taxes while waging a war.

Why don't we ask the second president in history to do it.....lol (If I'm not mistaken, my wife and I will be getting an 800 dollar stimulus check this year.)

Long time no see. :tongue:
 
Is taking money from a group of people and paying for other's mortgages in the constitution? Please show me where. Thanks.


BU$TED!!!!

"A group of 10 mortgage servicers agreed on Monday to pay a total of $8.5 billion to end a U.S. government-mandated case-by-case review of housing crisis foreclosures in an acknowledgement the program had proven too cumbersome and expensive.

Roughly 3.8 million borrowers whose homes were in foreclosure within the time frame of the review will receive cash compensation ranging from hundreds of dollars up to $125,000, depending on the type of errors they experienced, the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) said.

The reviews followed the "robo-signing" scandal that emerged in 2010 involving allegations banks pursued faulty foreclosures by using defective or fraudulent documents."

:eusa_boohoo:


529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
 
If we stuck to the US Constitution would our economy be in this position right now?

What do you think?

You don't define what 'following the constitution' is supposed to mean in terms of your question.

Oh, wait.

You're a fucking idiot.

Never mind.
 
If we stuck to the US Constitution would our economy be in this position right now?

What do you think?

we've been on a slow downward spiral ever since Andrew Jackson got elected...


if we'd been able to stick to the way the Framers had laid things out, we would be on top of the world...


the Framers doubted that we'd be able to get as far as we have...
 

Forum List

Back
Top