DGS49
Diamond Member
The linked essay argues that Trump and Musk still agree on the principle of taking from the "poor" and giving to the "rich."
Whether or not you agree with this assessment, why does nobody seem to ask the fundamental questions about entitlements, to wit, (1) Are they Constitutional, and (2) Are they wise, and (3) Can "we" afford them?
Article I of the Constitution makes NO PROVISION for Congress to give money to individuals. Search as long as you like, and you will find no "power" to pay for food, housing, education, or heathcare for individuals. Many Lefties incorrectly presume that the "general welfare" language authorizes Congress to spend on whatever it seems to promote the "general welfare," whatever that is. This argument is preposterous, and renders all of Section 8 superfluous.
Is it wise to extract money from some Americans to give it to others? No research supports this idea, with the operative principle being "dependency." Take away the "entitlement" and behavior will quickly fall into into line.
Manifestly, "we" lack the resources to pay for this cornucopia of vote-buying giveaways. I challenge anyone to present a rational argument that supports Federal entitlement programs. There is none.
I take the liberty of considering that SS is not an "entitlement" for the sake of this debate. It is separately funded and gets nothing out of FIT, which is the only thing that kept it from being declared unconstitutional from the beginning.
So rather than fretting about whether a tax cut is a "give-away" to The Rich, let's stop spending tax money on anything that is not authorized by the Constitution.
Budget balanced, immediately, like magic.
Whether or not you agree with this assessment, why does nobody seem to ask the fundamental questions about entitlements, to wit, (1) Are they Constitutional, and (2) Are they wise, and (3) Can "we" afford them?
Article I of the Constitution makes NO PROVISION for Congress to give money to individuals. Search as long as you like, and you will find no "power" to pay for food, housing, education, or heathcare for individuals. Many Lefties incorrectly presume that the "general welfare" language authorizes Congress to spend on whatever it seems to promote the "general welfare," whatever that is. This argument is preposterous, and renders all of Section 8 superfluous.
Is it wise to extract money from some Americans to give it to others? No research supports this idea, with the operative principle being "dependency." Take away the "entitlement" and behavior will quickly fall into into line.
Manifestly, "we" lack the resources to pay for this cornucopia of vote-buying giveaways. I challenge anyone to present a rational argument that supports Federal entitlement programs. There is none.
I take the liberty of considering that SS is not an "entitlement" for the sake of this debate. It is separately funded and gets nothing out of FIT, which is the only thing that kept it from being declared unconstitutional from the beginning.
So rather than fretting about whether a tax cut is a "give-away" to The Rich, let's stop spending tax money on anything that is not authorized by the Constitution.
Budget balanced, immediately, like magic.
