ImWaitingForTheDay
Annoy a conservative....Think for yourself
US Economy
- Thread starter texan
- Start date
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Audiobook, "Corporations verses The Market or Whip Conflation Now" written by Auburn University Professor of Philosophy Roderick T. Long. Read by Dr. Stephanie Murphy Phd.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEWbJh0teDM#t=53
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEWbJh0teDM#t=53
Returntosender
Well-Known Member
Dollar cap: China limits world’s highest foreign currency reserves
http://rt.com/business/foreign-currency-china-reserves-075/
http://rt.com/business/foreign-currency-china-reserves-075/
ImWaitingForTheDay
Annoy a conservative....Think for yourself
Lets start with Defense Medicare , social security..that should do it..
Nimnim
The Nim
Except defense is the only thing of those three specifically covered by the constitution as something the government should be doing.
well it doesn't say we should be the national defense for Japan, Europe, Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, and others.
Nimnim
The Nim
I do agree we shouldn't be world police, but beyond our own borders we should be helping out our allies in their time of need. So out of that list I'd say UK, Israel, and Japan. Japan only because of the surrender agreement saying they can't have their own military so while they have a defense force we should at least be ready to help them even if we don't have troops present in their area.
Pulling our forces back from areas we shouldn't be in to cover our own defenses and having the availability to support our allies should reduce costs even if the actual manpower isn't reduced. We're paying to occupy land in a lot of countries we don't need to.
The only point I am trying to make is that to a large dollar extent we could call much of our military spending "discretionary spending" just as we could social spending. The Constitution may not demand these expenditures, but neither does it forbid them. We do get to decide alot of it.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
The original purpose of forming the US National government was to ensure national defense, to mitigate conflicts between states and to regulate interstate commerce.
I agree that the military spending should be just for defense but there is nothing in the Constitution that even hints at the various social programs that the US National government mandates or funds.
oldngray
nowhere special
We used to have a Secretary of War before it was changed to the less offensive Secretary of Defense.
Again, does the Constitution forbid such social programs? Let's not confuse the a framework for representative government for a framework for unbridled capitalism.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
I've always found it interesting especially in the economic turmoil of 2008' that unbridled capitalism was to blame. OK, let's concede that point as true, that 2008' resulted from years if not decades of unbridled capitalism. Yet in those same years, social programs and what we call the welfare state also grew right along side of so-called unbridled capitalism and some the leading capitalists of the day openly supported such programs and candidates who advocated them. Let it also be pointed out that in those decades there were candidates elected who on the one hand allegedly championed for so-called unbridled capitalism while others championed for social programs and more often than not they ruled side by side and in cooperation with one another. Regardless of who held power, both seem to grow and benefit from those in power.
Leaves one IMO to possibly conclude that unbridled capitalism and social programs are not antagonistic to one another and in fact are committed partners. But if you only listen to the narratives.
Nimnim
The Nim
Personally I think it's more the majority of the politicians who "champion" these causes don't care what else happens as long as they hit enough points to either get re-elected or get some private gig that directly benefits from what they "got through" or even both. Once a person makes it to high office they make some good connections.
Only the truly devout to their office as a representative of the people or state does what's best for their constituents and not themselves. Sadly we almost never have any of those elected.
ITs called the GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE... try reading the constitution next time bro.
TOS.
