Considering that the main goal of a government is to protect the freedom of its citizens, having a large percentage of the expenditure going to military and police is very reasonable.Funny that because the more authoritarian governments such as North Korea tend to spend more on defence, than schools, healthcare etc.
Considering that the main goal of a government is to protect the freedom of its citizens, having a large percentage of the expenditure going to military and police is very reasonable.Funny that because the more authoritarian governments such as North Korea tend to spend more on defence, than schools, healthcare etc.
What's needed is a new social contract...
What's needed is a new social contract...
Unfortunately new social contracts are only signed as a result of a war that destroys the previous status quo.
I've always and still feel in the U.S. that our Constitution is our social contract. It states the limits of government powers and leaves all unstated rights for the states and the people.Where have you been for the last 20 years?
Seems like president Obama has over spoiled his brothers.
People have no right to live if they cannot pay.
What does social contract mean? Stuff people get for free because they are people?
I've always and still feel in the U.S. that our Constitution is our social contract. It states the limits of government powers and leaves all unstated rights for the states and the people.
What does social contract mean? Stuff people get for free because they are people?
I've always and still feel in the U.S. that our Constitution is our social contract. It states the limits of government powers and leaves all unstated rights for the states and the people.
Yes the U.S. Constitution was one of the best social contracts ever written. Unfortunately you can't say it is being upheld any more.
Considering that the main goal of a government is to protect the freedom of its citizens, having a large percentage of the expenditure going to military and police is very reasonable.I was just wondering where that statement comes from,
No one is entitled to other people's money, however.>
Most of what the US government does by count, and a large part of what the US government does by $ are not things the founding fathers envisioned in the constitution - ie. a large part of the US government is unconstitutional.
Both parties are guilty of leading us to where we are today.
… must pay this BS insurance money, despite I do not visit a hospital at all.You misunderstand the point of insurance. It's not about paying everyday expenses — indeed, most people could afford to pay routine doctor visits (especially if they had no insurance premiums to pay). But that's not why we insure. We insure so that if catastrophe strikes, you're covered even if the bills far exceed your total income. Otherwise, you'd die because you didn't have a million dollars to cover your three years of cancer treatment, for example.
'If those guys are happy 50 years after being taken by others, I will consider adopting their theories'
I think that should be the ultimate test for any policy proposals. If Obama thinks obanacare is good for us, put his family in it as well. If it is good for my family, it must be good for his too.
If he is not willing to subject his family to his own policies, why should we? Basic fairness.
But as far as "a large part of the US government is unconstitutional" anyone can have an opinion but only the SC past, present, and future can rule in fact if something is unconstitutional or not.
I was just wondering where that statement comes from,
There are some people just won't work, and want only meth and kush.
I've been "borrowed" money from about once per week by males of a specific race which I can not say for the sake of political correctness.
And it makes me wonder -- there are lots of uneducated and untrained out there, but at least they can end up with a job such as fast food restaurants or whatever that pays money.
Why some people, on the contrast, does not WANT to work, and just want to beg for money? I see both of them have both 4 limbs.
Seems like president Obama has over spoiled his brothers.
Quote from: dannyf on Today at 07:37:00
"I don't think the constitution protected individual freedom - slavery was legal then in some of the signatory states: it is possible "people" was defined differently then. it only provides that everyone has the same rights, under the equal protection clause. and we routinely stripe people of their freedom by putting them in jail for example."
"The constitution limits the feds to a few things, like war, equal protection, post office, commerce, foreign policies, measurements, and tax collection. Everything else, technically and constitutionally, is the domain of the states."
you would see BMWs, Cadillacs and Mercedes Benz cars parked around the state offices where they collected their checks.