No government required

[P@triot]

Ever heard of GPS?

Yeah, why? It is the result of the federal government’s constitutional responsibility for defense. Funny how that works, uh?

And so is the interstate highway system.

No it’s not, my fragile little snowflake. The U.S. Constitution does make “postal roads” the constitutional responsibility of the federal government, but not “interstate highways”. Class dismissed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ever heard of GPS?

Yeah, why? It is the result of the federal government’s constitutional responsibility for defense. Funny how that works, uh?

And so is the interstate highway system.

No it’s not, my fragile little snowflake. The U.S. Constitution does make “postal roads” the constitutional responsibility of the federal government, but not “interstate highways”. Class dismissed.

Eisenhower promoted the highway system after seeing how much the German military benefited from their highway system. Defense.

 

[P@triot]

Eisenhower promoted the highway system after seeing how much the German military benefited from their highway system.

So Eisenhower violated the U.S. Constitution to imitate the Nazis. And you applaud it.

Defense.

Sorry...doesn’t work that way. By that standard, the federal government could declare confiscating firearms falls under “defense”. Or eliminating your right to post on message boards how you agree with the U.S. mirroring the actions of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis as “defense players.

 

[P@triot]

Progressives accidentally proving once again that we don’t need government to engage in anything outside of the 18 enumerated powers we the people have delegated to them...

Mila Kunis revealed she’s donating to Planned Parenthood in VP Pence’s name — it backfires big time

 

[P@triot]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.
Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

You mean it took 20 years for MS to decide to tap a market?

And they are still exponentially more efficient than government. A sad reality you can’t bring yourself to accept.

 

[P@triot]

No government required....no coercion required....no force required. It’s amazing what happens when people are left to their own free will.

Eagles DE Chris Long to donate rest of 2017 NFL salary to charity

 

[Slade3200]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.

In July, Microsoft announced a “Rural Airband Initiative” to invest in partnerships with telecommunications companies to bring broadband connectivity to 2 million more people in rural America by 2022.

Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

Microsoft’s Plan to Expand Broadband Would Benefit Rural Americans

Our country is built on the premise of personal freedom for it's citizens to build a successful future for themselves. The primary goal of our government is to simply protect it's people from powers both domestic and abroad. Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market. There needs to be boundaries and regulations and a fair "referee" to insure that the system is free and fair. This is the purpose of government. There is a ton of corruption both in business and in government which has made this mission imperfect.

 

[P@triot]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

 

[Slade3200]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

 

[P@triot]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

Only one of us doesn’t get it - and I assure you it isn’t me.

 

[Norman]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.

In July, Microsoft announced a “Rural Airband Initiative” to invest in partnerships with telecommunications companies to bring broadband connectivity to 2 million more people in rural America by 2022.

Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

Microsoft’s Plan to Expand Broadband Would Benefit Rural Americans

Government is very much required for the hard leftists. They depend on the government to take the money from the working people and hand it to them.

Without the government, if they attempted this they would get shot. Some of them might prefer the option given that working an honest job and contributing to society is their worst nightmare come true.

 

[Slade3200]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

Only one of us doesn’t get it - and I assure you it isn’t me.

What don’t i get?

 

[P@triot]

What don’t i get?

That you are not a “victim” to corporations. That they have zero control over you.

 

[Slade3200]

What don’t i get?

That you are not a “victim” to corporations. That they have zero control over you.

Really? Tell that to the medical industry and the small business owners who had to shut their doors because they couldn’t compete with the large corporations. Don’t get me started

 

[P@triot]

What don’t i get?

That you are not a “victim” to corporations. That they have zero control over you.

Really? Tell that to the medical industry and the small business owners who had to shut their doors because they couldn’t compete with the large corporations. Don’t get me started

And....how....exactly does that make you a “victim”?

That’s called the free market. If the small business “couldn’t compete” it’s because they were incompetent. At one time, Facebook was a small business. Built by a child in a dorm room. At one time, Apple was a small business. Built out of a garage.

Literally the only time we see small businesses actually unable to compete is when government makes taxes, regulations, etc. that they simply cannot afford.

 

[Slade3200]

What don’t i get?

That you are not a “victim” to corporations. That they have zero control over you.

Really? Tell that to the medical industry and the small business owners who had to shut their doors because they couldn’t compete with the large corporations. Don’t get me started

And....how....exactly does that make you a “victim”?

That’s called the free market. If the small business “couldn’t compete” it’s because they were incompetent. At one time, Facebook was a small business. Built by a child in a dorm room. At one time, Apple was a small business. Built out of a garage.

Literally the only time we see small businesses actually unable to compete is when government makes taxes, regulations, etc. that they simply cannot afford.

I’m not saying I’m a “victim” I’m saying there is tremendous opportunity in an unregulated free market for big corporate entities to abuse their power. Do you really not believe that?

 

[emilynghiem]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

Only one of us doesn’t get it - and I assure you it isn’t me.

What don’t i get?

Dear P@triot and Slade3200
You are both talking about different angles by which
people CAN check big business (though this takes concerted effort to have any impact) and
ways big business SUBVERTS constitutional protections of people and free market
by MONOPOLIZING the legislative and legal process.

Yes to both, you are both right on both points:

1. Slade3200 's point is true that because "corporations" act as "individuals" with COLLECTIVE POWER
unequal to individuals, they can abuse this status to bypass Constitutional checks because those laws DON'T APPLY TO THEM.
Corporations are not required to follow the same limits on govt, unless the Corporations are sued, and lose in court, and enforce the orders.

It is VERY hard to do all 3 to check Corporations which run amok unchecked.
The Constitution does not protect us against Big Corporations
It is hard enough to hold Govt accountable to Constitutional checks,
and almost impossible to hold big corporations that monopolize courts, especially federal.
Even the lawyers all know this game is going on, and feel obliged to keep playing it for the money..

2. P@triot 's point is that the people's free choice is the ultimate check on Big Corporations by not doing business with them.
Yes, but this would have to be collectively organized to have the equivalent impact.
"One person" is not enough to stop a corporation that is considered a greater commercial interest.
So it has to be an organized movement of people to have the same impact as "one" corporate entity.

We can do this, but it takes a higher level of unity to meet and beat Corporations at their own game.

P and S: What is defeating the people in checking the Govt and Corporations
is we are divided by party instead of organizing as two witnesses to the same abuses!

Instead of fighting against each other, to compete whose party's wrongs are WORSE than the other,
why not agree to check ALL abuses that are outted by BOTH parties?

If the left checks the right, and the right checks the left,
if we support BOTH channels, we should clean up govt left and right!

Then when we have the audience of our govt,
then we can go after corporate abuses, that otherwise
take advantage of the division to get away with abuses at taxpayer expense.

We are letting the crooks ransack the store
while consumed in arguing with management
whose fault was greater for the lax security.
Why not focus on policing the STORE
instead of arguing whether to profile which
crooks are stealing more? We should be
going after ALL the crooks robbing the taxpayers.

Whether these are corporate or government or party interests!

When can we call a meeting of party members and leaders,
to organize a national movement for each party to police
different groups of crooks taking advantage and costing taxpayers?
How else can we address EVERY grievance, except we delegate
to the different parties to focus on different groups? The Greens
are good at researching environmental abuses costing us the public.
The Libertarians have researched out of control foreign spending
that has gotten the US in unauthorized debts deemed unconstitutional
which needs to get tracked and paid back instead of charging to taxpayers
without recourse. Republicans and Democrats are the best experts
at outting the abuses of taxmoney by the other party
so why not go after ALL these crooks, not compete to excuse one or the other.
We need to get paid back for ALL illicit spending or abuse of
public resources, laws and authority
The only thing missing is we are not fully united on all fronts.
if we did unite, that would be the national movement to check
ALL abuses whether by govt, party or corporate leaders.

So yes P@triot the people CAN check govt and corporations.
But it would take national unity to have the same weight.
We can do this, not by divided against each other, but
using parties to organize masses around EACH area of grievance and abuse.
so we stay focused, and not scattered. You are both right!

 

[ColonelAngus]

The left hates this undeniable reality - but here is yet another example that the government is not needed for anything outside of the 18 specific enumerated powers the states delegate to them.

In July, Microsoft announced a “Rural Airband Initiative” to invest in partnerships with telecommunications companies to bring broadband connectivity to 2 million more people in rural America by 2022.

Business will always build the infrastructure necessary (and more efficiently and at a lower cost) because it will ultimately end in more sales or lower cost for them.

Microsoft’s Plan to Expand Broadband Would Benefit Rural Americans

Ever heard of GPS? Hate to tell you, but it was developed by the government, and the government is also the ones that put in the infrastructure for it to be useful.

Incidentally, there was talk about not allowing civilians to use GPS, but then they changed their mind and released it to civilian companies.

Sorry.............but there are several examples where the government has developed things well ahead of civilian businesses.

Another one of them is the computer.

This post is hilarious.

The government pays civilian contractors. You might want to look into “The Aerospace Corporation”and “Applied physics Laboratory” for GPS development.


You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the government works.

The government takes my money and then pays private companies to develop technologies for government use.

The “government”itself develops very little, if anything. It’s a funding source, not a technology source.

 

[Slade3200]

Big business has tremendous power to inflict damage on our people by controlling the "free" market.

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

Only one of us doesn’t get it - and I assure you it isn’t me.

What don’t i get?

Dear P@triot and Slade3200
You are both talking about different angles by which
people CAN check big business (though this takes concerted effort to have any impact) and
ways big business SUBVERTS constitutional protections of people and free market
by MONOPOLIZING the legislative and legal process.

Yes to both, you are both right on both points:

1. Slade3200 's point is true that because "corporations" act as "individuals" with COLLECTIVE POWER
unequal to individuals, they can abuse this status to bypass Constitutional checks because those laws DON'T APPLY TO THEM.
Corporations are not required to follow the same limits on govt, unless the Corporations are sued, and lose in court, and enforce the orders.

It is VERY hard to do all 3 to check Corporations which run amok unchecked.
The Constitution does not protect us against Big Corporations
It is hard enough to hold Govt accountable to Constitutional checks,
and almost impossible to hold big corporations that monopolize courts, especially federal.
Even the lawyers all know this game is going on, and feel obliged to keep playing it for the money..

2. P@triot 's point is that the people's free choice is the ultimate check on Big Corporations by not doing business with them.
Yes, but this would have to be collectively organized to have the equivalent impact.
"One person" is not enough to stop a corporation that is considered a greater commercial interest.
So it has to be an organized movement of people to have the same impact as "one" corporate entity.

We can do this, but it takes a higher level of unity to meet and beat Corporations at their own game.

P and S: What is defeating the people in checking the Govt and Corporations
is we are divided by party instead of organizing as two witnesses to the same abuses!

Instead of fighting against each other, to compete whose party's wrongs are WORSE than the other,
why not agree to check ALL abuses that are outted by BOTH parties?

If the left checks the right, and the right checks the left,
if we support BOTH channels, we should clean up govt left and right!

Then when we have the audience of our govt,
then we can go after corporate abuses, that otherwise
take advantage of the division to get away with abuses at taxpayer expense.

We are letting the crooks ransack the store
while consumed in arguing with management
whose fault was greater for the lax security.
Why not focus on policing the STORE
instead of arguing whether to profile which
crooks are stealing more? We should be
going after ALL the crooks robbing the taxpayers.

Whether these are corporate or government or party interests!

When can we call a meeting of party members and leaders,
to organize a national movement for each party to police
different groups of crooks taking advantage and costing taxpayers?
How else can we address EVERY grievance, except we delegate
to the different parties to focus on different groups? The Greens
are good at researching environmental abuses costing us the public.
The Libertarians have researched out of control foreign spending
that has gotten the US in unauthorized debts deemed unconstitutional
which needs to get tracked and paid back instead of charging to taxpayers
without recourse. Republicans and Democrats are the best experts
at outting the abuses of taxmoney by the other party
so why not go after ALL these crooks, not compete to excuse one or the other.
We need to get paid back for ALL illicit spending or abuse of
public resources, laws and authority
The only thing missing is we are not fully united on all fronts.
if we did unite, that would be the national movement to check
ALL abuses whether by govt, party or corporate leaders.

So yes P@triot the people CAN check govt and corporations.
But it would take national unity to have the same weight.
We can do this, not by divided against each other, but
using parties to organize masses around EACH area of grievance and abuse.
so we stay focused, and not scattered. You are both right!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Emily. I agree with what you’re saying and would point out that partisanship is a huge factor in that divide. My original point is that one of the main purposes of government is to act as the voice of the people. The government should be that collective that you are speaking of. It is structured in a way to represent communities, cities, states and finally our nation to reflect the will of the people and protect our citizens from abuse at all levels. Unfortunately there has been corruption in both our free market and our government so both entities need to be checked. I still believe the government can and is intended to act in the best interest of the people but perhaps we have more of a responsibility to hold our representatives accountable and root out the corruption and bad actors.

I feel like the political Right is mostly focused with government corruption while turning a blind eye to corruption in the free market while the political left does just the opposite. It would be nice to put the ugly partisanship aside and actually be able to work with each other to find a productive and healthy median.

 

[emilynghiem]

How do you figure? McDonald’s is a massive corporation. But they can’t do a thing to you if you choose not to do business with them. Just don’t order their fries and you are completely free from their reach.

Come on man, do I really need to explain this to you? You can’t just throw out a simplistic example like, if you don’t like McDonald’s then don’t go there, and think that addresses what I’m talking about. Do you really not get it?

Only one of us doesn’t get it - and I assure you it isn’t me.

What don’t i get?

Dear P@triot and Slade3200
You are both talking about different angles by which
people CAN check big business (though this takes concerted effort to have any impact) and
ways big business SUBVERTS constitutional protections of people and free market
by MONOPOLIZING the legislative and legal process.

Yes to both, you are both right on both points:

1. Slade3200 's point is true that because "corporations" act as "individuals" with COLLECTIVE POWER
unequal to individuals, they can abuse this status to bypass Constitutional checks because those laws DON'T APPLY TO THEM.
Corporations are not required to follow the same limits on govt, unless the Corporations are sued, and lose in court, and enforce the orders.

It is VERY hard to do all 3 to check Corporations which run amok unchecked.
The Constitution does not protect us against Big Corporations
It is hard enough to hold Govt accountable to Constitutional checks,
and almost impossible to hold big corporations that monopolize courts, especially federal.
Even the lawyers all know this game is going on, and feel obliged to keep playing it for the money..

2. P@triot 's point is that the people's free choice is the ultimate check on Big Corporations by not doing business with them.
Yes, but this would have to be collectively organized to have the equivalent impact.
"One person" is not enough to stop a corporation that is considered a greater commercial interest.
So it has to be an organized movement of people to have the same impact as "one" corporate entity.

We can do this, but it takes a higher level of unity to meet and beat Corporations at their own game.

P and S: What is defeating the people in checking the Govt and Corporations
is we are divided by party instead of organizing as two witnesses to the same abuses!

Instead of fighting against each other, to compete whose party's wrongs are WORSE than the other,
why not agree to check ALL abuses that are outted by BOTH parties?

If the left checks the right, and the right checks the left,
if we support BOTH channels, we should clean up govt left and right!

Then when we have the audience of our govt,
then we can go after corporate abuses, that otherwise
take advantage of the division to get away with abuses at taxpayer expense.

We are letting the crooks ransack the store
while consumed in arguing with management
whose fault was greater for the lax security.
Why not focus on policing the STORE
instead of arguing whether to profile which
crooks are stealing more? We should be
going after ALL the crooks robbing the taxpayers.

Whether these are corporate or government or party interests!

When can we call a meeting of party members and leaders,
to organize a national movement for each party to police
different groups of crooks taking advantage and costing taxpayers?
How else can we address EVERY grievance, except we delegate
to the different parties to focus on different groups? The Greens
are good at researching environmental abuses costing us the public.
The Libertarians have researched out of control foreign spending
that has gotten the US in unauthorized debts deemed unconstitutional
which needs to get tracked and paid back instead of charging to taxpayers
without recourse. Republicans and Democrats are the best experts
at outting the abuses of taxmoney by the other party
so why not go after ALL these crooks, not compete to excuse one or the other.
We need to get paid back for ALL illicit spending or abuse of
public resources, laws and authority
The only thing missing is we are not fully united on all fronts.
if we did unite, that would be the national movement to check
ALL abuses whether by govt, party or corporate leaders.

So yes P@triot the people CAN check govt and corporations.
But it would take national unity to have the same weight.
We can do this, not by divided against each other, but
using parties to organize masses around EACH area of grievance and abuse.
so we stay focused, and not scattered. You are both right!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Emily. I agree with what you’re saying and would point out that partisanship is a huge factor in that divide. My original point is that one of the main purposes of government is to act as the voice of the people. The government should be that collective that you are speaking of. It is structured in a way to represent communities, cities, states and finally our nation to reflect the will of the people and protect our citizens from abuse at all levels. Unfortunately there has been corruption in both our free market and our government so both entities need to be checked. I still believe the government can and is intended to act in the best interest of the people but perhaps we have more of a responsibility to hold our representatives accountable and root out the corruption and bad actors.

I feel like the political Right is mostly focused with government corruption while turning a blind eye to corruption in the free market while the political left does just the opposite. It would be nice to put the ugly partisanship aside and actually be able to work with each other to find a productive and healthy median.

Yes Slade3200 when I bring up the point of holding Corporations accountable,
I get blank stares from both Republicans and Democrats, with only certain GREEN leaders having researched this problem and found a path to a solution. They recommend lobbying the state to revoke charters for corporations that abuse their personhood, and to demand to revoke that.

When I approached the Texas Democratic Party resolution committee about introducing a clause to hold Corporations accountable to the same Bill of rights and Code of ethics that govt is expected to follow, I was told in no uncertain terms that "private entities cannot be held to govt standards" and that these "code of ethics" would have to be rewritten as a state policy that applies to citizens and corporations.

In order to establish this common standard, all citizens and both parties would h ave to agree to the terms, similar to how the
Code of Ethics was written and passed UNANIMOUSLY through Congress.
www.ethics-commission.net

(Ironically it was the Democrats who violated this standard and supported Obama and Pelosi in mixing private "insurance" corporate interests and PARTY agenda/beliefs with govt instead of keeping them separated. The reason Democrats are unable to hold Republicans and Corporations to enforcing Constitutional standards is they bypass them and refuse to uphold them either. The Democrats are worse than the Republicans on this. At least the Republicans will check their own; so even though I get "blank stares" from both, if I pursue and argue on Constitutional grounds, I can eventually get some kind of answer out of Conservatives who commit to those standards, but the Democrats tend to push for party agenda and don't base their authority of law on the Constitution. The exceptions being Democrats who are Military or police and have taken oaths to uphold the Constitution, and some Muslim or Black church or activist members who put God's laws before party politics. At this point, it appears the Black Muslim and women leadership may be the bridge between parties to establish "common Constitutional ground", since the "white male politics" has become divided in endless turf wars for domination by one pack outbarking the others!)