Thank you for those comments. I think any who feel "forced" are just
admitting we don't want to sign the Constitution we were all born under.
More like rebels than patriots. Sure, we may not have had a choice about what
social contracts we were born into, but aren't we lucky for having been
born into this one?Yes, taxes are used for welfare. Aren't we
proud to see our wealth redistributed to the poor? We do it privately, through
NGO's, and through various levels of government. We approve of this
practice through our duly elected representatives, as did our parents and
grandparents. The Supreme Court says it's constitutional. We, the people,
choose to pay taxes, regulate our own behavior, and serve the needy, all as a
group. We are not hermits.I love how government itself can take on
the virtue we share as citizens in choosing to "exalt the poor in that the
rich are made low."Of course it would be better if we were not
forced. So, let's pause to reflect about our riches. Let's make a
sober re-commitment to true patriotism.
Many people look at their personal situation and then believe that it is
universal.Yes, many people have family and friends who would be
happy to help them out in hard times.If only that were the case for
everyone.Try to imagine living paycheck to paycheck and then having
major medical problems or even major car problems. Then think about if all of
your family and friends were in similar situations.There are lots
of people in this country who do not know a lot of people with the means to come
to their aid in times of need.Maybe not so much in Utah, but in much
of the country. Try walking in others shoes.
Yes, MOST taxes are "forced charity"!Article 1, Section 8 of
the Constitution list the only duties which the Federal Government has authority
to tax us. MOST federal programs are not on that very short enumerated list.
That means that all of those programs must be left to the States or to the
people to handle.The Utah State Constitution lists those duties that
we, the people of Utah, have assigned to the State. Any payment made by the
State to anyone for anything that is outside that scope is just as wrong as
bloated federal spending. Those expenditures are "forced charity".Go down the list through the County, the City and the neighborhood
improvement council. Any time any level of government spends anything on any
unauthorized function, that expenditure is "forced charity".The Lord never assigned responsibility to government on any level to care for
his people. He left that duty to each of us. No matter what your political
persuasion, if you think that government is responsible for personal welfare,
you are one of the "liberals" who think that spending someone
else's money is better than spending your own and you believe in
Excellent letter Mr. Terry."If Republicans truly want to bridge
the gap in their party philosophy between reality and rhetoric, they need to
stop using irresponsible terms like "forced charity" and start
recognizing that government is not evil."So well said. We are
nation of people not a group of individuals. We need each other to make this
nation work and while the dream of our nation is that everyone should be
repsonsible for his/her own well being, the realities of life (illness) and
weaknesses of mankind (prejudice, selfishness, pride, greed, corruption) make it
necessary for us to find ways to make the system work for all of us. Certainly there are those who will exploit any system, whether they are
desititute or wealthy, and we should do all we can to see that those who abuse
and misuse our noble intentions are sought out and punished. But that should not
stop us from using our resourses to make life better for the nation as a whole.
America was built on taxes. I'm always amazed to hear
conservatives tout the glories of the free market, but when you point out how
the very basics we take from granted -- from roads to railroads to courts that
protect copyright to clean water to nuclear power to the great farmlands of the
Louisiana Purchase to the Internet -- were all built/procured by government with
American tax dollars, you realize that the free market has benefited greatly by
so-called hated "forced charity."A piece of trivia --
conservatives love to poke fun at Al Gore over his "I invented the
Internet" statement. Here's the reality: The Internet was a
government initiative, and in 1992, Gore sponsored a bill in Congress to allow
businesses to operate on the Internet. It passed, and today, without Al
Gore's vision for an online economy, we wouldn't have Facebook,
Google, Pinterest, and a host of other online companies, services, and JOBS that
we take for granted. Yes, there is government waste. But the
reality is that government investment in infrastructure, education, and services
from "forced charity" is the backbone of not only the free market, but
America's way of life.
As with all of his other posts, Mike Richards presents his opinion as fact, when
in fact his point of view is in the vast minority. The general welfare section
of Article 1, Section 8 has been interpreted by the US Supreme Court (over the
years and through many decisions) as providing Congress with almost unlimited
authority to appropriate taxes in any way it sees fit for the welfare of the
nation.It is a fact that if a government (federal, state, local)
levied a tax or expended funds on "unauthorized" activities that entity
would be sued. Mr. Richards just really doesn't like democracy. We elect
leaders who then either use the laws currently available or create new laws to
govern our society. One man's "forced charity" is another
man's appropriate use of tax dollars. The law provides guidance on who is
correct.Since Mr. Richards is fond of mixing religion with
government, I leave him with this thought from Christ: "Render unto Caesar
the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are
Al Gore had nothing to do with inventing the internet and facebook would of
existed without him. There is no authorization of forced charity in
constitution. Churches, families and individuals always and still do take care
of poor people. We didn't have higher crimes before that. I guess sheriff
can come take my car or bread for the poor people.
" Any payment made by the State to anyone for anything that is outside that
scope is just as wrong as bloated federal spending. Those expenditures are
"forced charity"."Sorry Mr Richards, but even things IN
the scope of government can be considered "FORCED CHARITY"If
I have NO kids but have to pay school tax, that is forced charity. Even though
it is in the scope.You have a narrow view of what govt can or should
do. There are many things that are not specifically spelled out in
the constitution. That is why we have a supreme court. Things change. Things
evolve. Not everything that exists today could have been envisioned 200+ years
ago.So we have a supreme court that interprets the constitution
based on the realities of today. And they, not you, determine what is legal
under our constitution.While I am confident that our founders would
see many abuses, they would also disagree with your interpretation.Think about your own life and tell me that you have not been a large
beneficiary of the "forced charity" that you so decry.
A bloated, overspending, over regulating, and wasteful government where 47% of
Americans do not pay any federal income taxes is NOT charitable! If so, then
under the author's definition of charity only about 10% of Americans who
pay about 80% of federal taxes can be considered charitable. Forced charity is
not charity, its confiscation!
Mountanman,Be very careful with the confiscation/theft arguments on
taxation. If a tax is theft then ALL tax for ANY amount of govt. are also
theft.The reality is that taxes are part of the social contract from
which we all benefit. If we want a world without taxes, we want a world without
any govt.Of course there are good arguments to be made about less
spending and less taxation. But that is LESS not NONE.We need to be
cautious that we do not argue ourselves into a world where govt. does not (or
cannot) exist. It would be savage beyond belief.
JoeBlow,If you live in a State that has authorized tax dollars to
used for education, then you are not being forced to educate children. That is
part of your duty. In Utah, we spend much of the tax money for education. I do
not begrudge the schools those dollars, but I do expect those in the schools who
spend the money to use it wisely.The same is for all government
services. IF those services are authorized, then we are responsible to pay for
them.-----Some people, like UTCProgess, don't
understand the limits that we have placed on government. They think that
because liberal presidents and liberal courts have allowed public spending for
personal welfare, that that spending is Constitutional; but they refuse to admit
that any President and any Court that exceeded the limits placed on it by the
people has violated our trust. They seem to think that if someone can "get
away" with something, that that "something" is legal.General Welfare is not personal welfare. It never has been, no matter how
many times liberals tell us otherwise.
A very good and truthful letter.But among many American
"patriots," greed and not charity is paramount. They also fail to
realize that taxes pay for the services they demand. Yes, demand.Can you imagine the hue and cry if any government at any level stopped
maintaining roads, or water or sewer systems, or if homeowners had to pay a fee
to have the fire department respond?Some of the previous comments
here reflect the normal "conservative" hypocrisy that tries to run and
ruin or nation.
@ Twin Lights: The six categories of wasteful and unnecessary spending that I
can think of are:1.Programs that should be devolved to state and local
governments; Education, agriculture, fish and wildlife programs.2.Programs
that could be better performed by the private sector; "Green"
energy-Solyndra.3.Mistargeted programs whose recipients should not be
entitled to government benefits; Food stamp abuse. 4.Outdated and
unnecessary programs; Snail sex research, etc., etc.5.Duplicative
programs; 316 federal handicap assistance programs. 6.Inefficiency,
mismanagement, and fraud.This is charity? If so then real charity means
If a tax is theft, then the US Constitution was written by thieves, as it
plainly grants Congress the power to tax. I'm pleased to pay taxes to
"provide for the general welfare," as the Constitution also plainly
states in Article 8.
@ Mike & J: Please define "We the People" and explain how "We
the People" are to enact the powers left to us by the 10th Amendment.
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahYes, MOST taxes are "forced
charity"!higvDietrich, IDMountanmanHayden, IDJ ThompsonSPRINGVILLE, UT================ 1. I assume all of you are Republicans.2. I
also assume you are all LDS.3. The letter writer is correct. Taxes
are "Not Forced Charity".My reply then is this ---a. My taxes are being used to wage War in the Middle East, and given to
Corporations.b. Christ said to pipe down and just pay your taxes.c.
Besides -- So, if you are who you claim you are, then you should
already know that;"Charity is the pure love of Christ."therefore - Taxes are definetley NOT Forced Charity.
Mountanman,Please drop the 47 percent argument you keep making.
Instead start asking why 47 percent of our population cannot earn enough to
qualify to pay income tax. If you can fix that problem, then you'll be
doing something useful. In the meantime, simply admit that those in the 47
percent pay all sorts of other taxes that are a greater burden on them than the
39.6 percent income tax the wealthy must now pay on taxable income over $450,000
($400,000 for single taxpayers) and the lower rates they pay on income under
"I do not begrudge the schools those dollars,"I do not
either. But, at least lets call it what it is. People without
children are "forced" to pay money to educate the children of others.
While people with modest means and lots of children pay very little. As I said. I am fine with that. What gives me pause is those who get huge
govt handouts at tax payer expense and then whine and moan when others get
similar treatment.There are many people included in that 47% number
who scream loudly, without realizing (or admitting) that they fall into that
category. (or have at one time or another)What I get is deserved.
What the other guy gets is an entitlement and should be berated for it.
"If Republicans were able to leave all these government functions to
voluntary charity,"And which Republicans want ALL (military, police,
etc.) government services to be run by charity or believe that having any
government is evil?This letter is classic distortion of what other believe
presented as fact in order to vilify a political opponent: I.e. “all
liberals smoke pot”Small government is not NO governmentWhen
government goes beyond legitimate needs, such as defense and education, and
begins social manipulation to provide services that people can do themselves or
others can do for them without government interference (or near half of the
population pays NO taxes) - then "forced charity” is as good of word
as any to describe it, and “EXTREMIST” is as good of word as any to
describe the inability of those on the hard left who refuse to comprehend the
fact that “small” and “No” are not synonyms
My oh my! Roger, what have you done???!!! Look at how you got all the am radio
regurgitating righties all worked up! Anything that gets folks like mm and mikey
Richards angry, is a good letter to me. Keep it up!
@ The real Maverick. You applaud as we march to ever more and more national
debt, more dependency and less productivity and eventual bankruptcy! Keep it up!
higv said, "Al Gore had nothing to do with inventing the internet and
facebook would of existed without him."I might agree with the
last part of this sentence but the first part is just plain nonsense. Baron
Scarpia clearly outlined the role that Al Gore played in the creation of the
interent. If he had not done what he did, perhaps someone else would have. But
the fact is he did it and so his claim is not ridiculous, as many would have us
believe, but is based on fact. It is just one way which a government process,
using government resources, has benfited us all. It doesn't
mean that government can or will meet all our needs. We live in a capitalistic
society and the basis of our system is free market. We could take all day and
then some to debate how free that market is but the fact is we rely on the
private sector to make the system work. But sometimes, and more times than many
want to admit, the government is necessary and, in fact, does a good job of
helping all our lives. Why is that so hard to admit?
Excellent letter, right on point and exceptionally well reasoned.
The left's false arguments against conservatives give me a good chuckle now
and then, like this letter. They set up a straw man to fight, then pretend to
be Joe Frazier.Conservatives have NEVER made the argument that all
tax money is forced charity, only taxes used in place of charities. The poor
are best helped by 1) a strong free-market economy that creates jobs and wealth,
and 2) local charities that can run and distribute efficiently without an
expensive overhead bureaucracy.
But sometimes, and more times than many want to admit, the government is NOT
necessary and, in fact, gets in the way of helping all our lives. Why is that so
hard to admit?The basic assumption of the letter writer that ALL
Republicans want all government services to be covered by charity is simply
histrionic blather and outright LIE.Statistically; all Republicans
and even tea partiers believe there is a legitimate role for government - They
also believe that there are areas where government merely gets in the way. That
is where the dispute lies. Why must the letter writer and supporting posters
feel the need to lie about what others believe in order to make their point?
LDS Liberal, you're twisting the scriptures - again.In
America, the government does not "own" the money. All money belongs to
the people except that money which the people (you and me, Maudine) have
authorized the government to take from them by asking their State to ratify the
Constitution and to give government limited authority to act on their behalf.
This is not Rome and we don't have Caesar ruling over us. You compound the
infraction by demanding that government use God against us. The "pure love
of Christ" has nothing at all to do with taxes. Certainly, as a devout
Christian, you know that.The federal government has no power in and
of itself. Its "rights" are derived from the governed. It functions at
the behest of the people. The people have set its limits. The people have only
authorized it to perform seventeen duties. It's right there in black and
white for you and the rest of the world to see. The people have no hidden
agenda. They don't twist their own words. Only corrupt politicians and
those outside of government who love corruption think that government has the
right to rule over the people.
No reasonable person on the right is "anti-government". We understand
the need for government and thus taxes. The problem is that we have a Federal
Government that is so large and has so many tasks that it is unable to perform
any effectively. What is wrong with having a Federal Government with limited and
explicit responsibilities? We can't even win a war decisively in a third
world basket case country like Afghanistan. We've fought a "war on
poverty" for 50 years and apparently wasted billions of dollars and our
friends on the left insist we still have a problem with poverty. Why is that? Contrary to most left wing ideology there are other pillars of society
besides government : families, churches, civic organizations etc. But in America
circa 2013 the Government has to usurp all the responsibilities of those
institutions. Are we better off because of that?
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahLDS Liberal, you're twisting the
scriptures - again.In America, the government does not "own"
the money. All money belongs to the people except that money which the people============ And we believe people do not "own" the
money. All money (things) come from God an belongs to him.We can
either hord it unto ourselves, or do our best to re-distribute (by
WHATEVER means) to all.D&C 104: 17, 18 17 For the earth is
full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have
given unto the children of men...18 Therefore, if any man shall take
of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the
law... unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes
in hell, being in torment.-----You see, this is were we
are vastly differ...We don't need "the Church" to do
everything God has asked us to do.WE as a people, as a Nation under God
can do it, -- and quite frankly, God really doesn't care HOW we obey,
just as long as it gets done.Your turn...
Let's see, LDS Liberal is telling us that it's alright to use force to
make us do good. Maybe he would like to tell us exactly whose plan that was and
why that person and one-third of the hosts of heaven were ejected for promoting
that plan."Forced charity" is not and has never been a plan
associated with any religion that follows Christ. Forcing citizens to be
religious is not allowed by the Constitution. If they choose to be religious
and if they choose to follow the doctrine of Christ, then they are free to do
so, but no one in government has the right in America to force anyone else to be
charitable or to be stripped of his God given stewardship so that they
(government) can claim that they are true followers of Christ. When anyone tells
us that forcing us to follow Christ is a tenet of our government, that person is
not only full of baloney, but he has twisted the Constitution and the Doctrines
of the Master to suit his own purposes.
It totally is forced every step of the way. Do you guys truly think that all the
taxes we pay goes toward government infastucture? I bet only a micro fraction
goes towards that. Most of it goes towards paying for the Governments palaces
and their frivolous lifestyle. If Government got out of the way, we
would be so abundant as a society. Everybody will have full time jobs and be
able to take care of themselves, there will be charity hospitals, cancer and
other diseases can be better treated. But the Government profits off of our pain
and misery and have many misguided people that think they work for the
government and not the other way around. IF they want to pay taxes so much, let
them pay mine also. The country has become and Empire. Nothing is
free anymore it's all facism.
LDS liberal. It's the government that hoarding it all for
themselves. But you will never believe such a thing because you like to take
facism and tyranny and try to twist them into a gospel principle that you feel
people should be forced to accept as such. I personally think your a
paid government troll.
If you wish a scriptural discussion on charity I would offer the following
point:Jesus and his disciples collected money for "the
poor". The poor did not get it all because one Mr J. Iscariot was the
treasurer and kept some of it for himself. That was not authorized by Jesus but
it happened anyway. And likewise today the "charitable"
money collected by government for their good causes goes as much or more to
those who administer these causes as to the intended and pretended
beneficiaries. This is bad enough when "contributions" are voluntary
and infinitely worse imo when they are taken forcibly from people and especially
when applied to controversial causes with heavy administrative costs.
Big Government is Tyranny and Slavery. If people lived the Gospel, Big
Government would never prosper. People would be too wise to their act.
You think Churches or Charities should provide for the poor, sick, needy, or
elderly?Well, 90% of the wealth of this nation is owned by 1-2%. If that 1% would pay 10% charity we wouldn't be having this
discussion.And, is it right for someone to join a Church to receive
charity?I've heard Bishops tell missionaries not to baptize people
living in trailer parks or hispanics because they were just looking for charity.
Do you agree?The LDS Church - who I'm a proud member of
- can't provide enough "charity" to take care of our own.FYI
- Tithing is NOT Charity, even if Romney's tax return said it is.>50% of Americans do not belong to any church.But, 100% of Americans
belong to America.So, I think the solution to America's problem lies
within us, as America -- not as splintered groups of religious sects.I stand by my previous post.Charity is the pure love of Christ.Therefore, Taxes are not Forced Charity.P.S. The only religion who
comes even close to pulling this off are the Amish.
There is also no such thing as forced charity because forced charity isn't
charity at all.
“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are
the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of
religion into their own hands;they may appoint teachers in every State, county
and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their
own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools
throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may
undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every
thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute
object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress. Were the power of
Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the
very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government
established by the people of America.”-James Madison“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution
which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the
money of their constitutents.”-James Madison
To "Roger Terry" if you want we can call it what it truely is, rather
than using the soft "Forced Charity" term.When taxes are
being used to fund social welfare programs, we can simply call them Socialist
programs or else Forced Redistribution of Wealth. Either way you are
accomplishing the same thing. Taking from those who have to give to those who
don't through tax codes is not a good thing.
We sacrifice to get along with other people. If we are rude, people avoid us.
That's not force, but it certainly helps us behave. Other behaviors are
more important to society, so we have codified them into law. If we speed or
cheat on our taxes force may be used against us on behalf of the greater good.
So, yes, taxes are forced. Right. Forced charity is not charity.
God doesn't credit people for obeying commandments grudgingly. I'm
sad to hear from those who hate paying taxes. They prefer sucking on pickles
instead being pleased by how much good they do. Yes, there is waste
and fraud in the government. We are duty bound to discover and correct those
abuses because the taxes they waste are truly a burden on us. Let's work
together on that.Yes, the poor are entitled to our charity. Malachi
3:5 "And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness
against ... those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the
fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me,
saith the Lord of hosts."
To "John C. C." I like the scripture game.My favorite is
this one: D&C 56:17 "Wo unto you poor men, whose hearts are not broken,
whose spirits are not contrite, and whose bellies are not satisfied, and whose
hands are not stayed from laying hold upon other men’s goods, whose eyes
are full of greediness, and who will not labor with your own hands!"For the Non-LDS folks there is always this one:Luke 12:13-15
"13 And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that
he divide the inheritance with me.14 And he said unto him, Man, who
made me a judge or a divider over you?15 And he said unto them, Take
heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the
abundance of the things which he possesseth."Just some food for
LDS LiberalI believe you are (unfortunately) correct. There is not
enough charity to meet the real needs out there. Folks need to read Dickens.
Britain was a first world power in those days.BTW, of course folks
should not take upon themselves a sacred covenant for money. But we should
exercise great care in assuming that is their motive.Anti
Bush-ObamaSeriously, your post sounds a bit out there. We are not
under fascism.Red state prideWe have the federal govt.
we have voted for.Thinkin\' ManAgreed. The poor
are best helped by a strong economy/jobs and efficient local charities. But has
that EVER been sufficient (outside of a closely knit religious group such as the
Mormon pioneers)?Counter Intelligence“Small
government is not NO government”. Agreed. The discussion of
“legitimate needs” are what we need to be having.Irony
Guy,Too funny.Mountanman,Agreed that each of
these is an area worthy of discussion. My point was simply that when folks
adopt the argument of “taxes=theft” we start down a path with a very
Mountanm,an 8:24May I please add some comments to your list ?"Programs that should be devolved to state and local governments;
Education, agriculture, fish and wildlife programs." Just a comment, it took
the National Guard (federal govenrment) to integrate state run education in the
south."Programs that could be better performed by the private
sector; "Green" energy-Solyndra." Umm...Solyndra is a private
sector company"Mistargeted programs whose recipients should not
be entitled to government benefits; Food stamp abuse." Gotta agree with you
on this one. Cheaters should always be punished. "Outdated and
unnecessary programs; Snail sex research, etc., etc." Anoother agreement.
Do these really exist?"Duplicative programs; 316 federal
handicap assistance programs." by all means, redundancy is wasteful and
should done away with. "Inefficiency, mismanagement, and fraud.
This is charity? If so then real charity means nothing!" Adctually what
that is is INnefficency, mismanagement and fraud. No one ever suggested it was
charity.Now can I ask you this? Do you think that the poorest among
us are the ones doing all the cheating? That doesn't make sense to me. It
is those who do not qualify for the benefits that are cheating.
Wow! This has been an interesting thread. What I'm seeing is a lot of
people who are telling us to be just like Christ and give everything to the poor
when what they really are saying that it is not fair that the rich only have to
pay 80% of all taxes. I believe that they are stomping their feet because they
covet the wealth of the rich guy and they want to take away his wealth. I have
not seen any of them offer to pay more than they have to but I have seem many of
them tell the rest of us how ungrateful we are if we do not believe in their
idea of charity.Oh well. Charity suffereth long so those of us who
do not think that the government has any business pretending to be God's
helper will have to suffer their insolence. They can take up charity with their
Maker when they explain to him how they helped him do his work by forcing
everyone to be charitable.
To "ECR" everything that Mountanman said is true.From
Bloomberg ".U.S. Auditors Say Duplicate Programs Cost Billions" the CBO
found $100 billion in redundant programs.From USA Today "Senate
procedural snarl could shutdown FAA again" we read that the federal
government spends "$111,804 for a sanctuary for white (albino) squirrels in
Kenton, Tenn." There is always the study to figure out why more lesbian and
bisexual women are obese.Various sources put welfare fraud at $100
billion in the US. Medicare fraud and abuse is just about as bad.The problem with government safety nets is that people find it easy to abuse
federal programs. Get those programs down to the community level and the fraud
and waste is much, much lower.
@ Mike: So, "We the People" are the government - then, if
the government is doing something, isn't it doing it because "We the
People" authorized it - under the power of the 10th Amendment - to do just
that?How can "We the People" the government authorize the
government to do something that is unconstitutional? If we authorize the
government to do something under the power of the 10th Amendment, it is
Constitutionally authorized.Congress members who have proposed and
passed laws establishing social safety nets did so under request of "We the
People" and our power of the 10th Amendment. Presidents who have signed
those laws into effect have done so under request of "We the People" and
our power of the 10th Amendment.You may not agree with that action,
but enough US citizens did agree with it that those who agreed to do it were
elected. This is how life under our Constitution works.We the
People use our power of the 10th Amendment to enact laws and to do the things we
want done. We do this when needed things are not being taken care of without
those laws. This is the power given by the 10th Amendment.
If taxes are used for any charitable or benificient purpose,it is
@Maudine,Does the whole idea of having limits on government disturb
you? The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. The People can change it
by asking Congress to consider their request, but Congress cannot amend the
Constitution, only the States can. The people cannot be in violation of the law
because they have no authority to legislate. The popular will of the people
never enters into the discussion. The Constitution tells us exactly how we can
modify it (Article V). Using any other means is illegal.Obama has
no authority to change the Constitution. You or I have no authority to change
the Constitution. Congress, without 75% of the States agreeing, cannot change
the Constitution.It does not matter how "popular" anything
is. We are a nation of laws. Disregarding law destroys a nation.There are many who think that they can drum up support for this movement or
that movement, and by willpower alone, change the way that government is allowed
to work. The Constitution keeps that from happening.Constitutional
authorization to "force charity" must be shown before Congress can act,
popular opinion notwithstanding.
Yeah, but you see, the thing is Richards, you don't understand the
Mike says: "In America, the government does not 'own' the
money." Sorry, but this is not true. I just pulled a $1 bill out of my
wallet. Across the top it says, "Federal Reserve Note." Below that:
"The United States of America." It is signed by the Treasurer of the
United States and the Secretary of the Treasury. It belongs to the government.
The government allows us to use these notes to ease the exchange of goods and
services. A note, by the way, is "a written promise to pay a debt." So,
when you hold a dollar bill or many of them, you hold a chunk of debt, and the
businesses and individuals who abide by the rules of our national economy agree
to grant you real wealth in exchange for your debt. That wealth might come in
the form of a car, a carrot, a computer, or a haircut. Without this
government-created instrument called money, we would be reduced to bartering
with each other.Oh, what's the use. . .
Yes those dirty rotten selfish rich people making all this money and just
sitting on it while the rest of us eek out a meager existence. According to
Forbes magazine as of February 2012 the top 50 donors in America had given or
pledged over $10 billion to charities. And that was just in 2011 alone. Yes we
really need to go after those greedy CEO's. And that doesn't account
for all the selfish little people who give only $1 million.
To "Lew Scannon" that is a lame argument. My cell phone says T-mobil on
it, but they don't own it, I do. Just like my car that says Toyota on it,
I own it. Plus you have missed the stories where some communities have printed
their own money.Yes the your money says Federal Reserve on it, but
that is because they print it and are the only ones authorized to print money
for the US.What about your bank account, who owns the money there,
is that your money or is that the government's money? The electrons and
magnetic media containing the balance for my accounts don't have a label on
RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTJust like my car that says Toyota on it,
=============A Union built car, in a Socialist
nation.Good for you RedShirt.You propably own stuff you bought
from Communist China as well.Please stop lecturing us about the
evils of Communism & Socialism until you are willing to put your money where
your mouth is.
To "RedShirt" again, wrong. My truck was built in Texas by a non-union
shop for about $2000 less than the union run shops cost.FYI, most
Toyota and Honda cars in the US are built IN the US by non-union labor. They do
it cheaper and better than the unions do.Please stop lecturing on
things you apparently don't understand or don't bother to research.
re:RedShirtThe most "American" cars (most American-made
parts and assembly) are the Toyota Camry and Toyota Avalon. "The AP reported that the average United Auto Workers member makes $29.78
per hour at GM, while Toyota pays its workers (most of whom are non-union) about
$30 per hour. However, when total benefits (including pensions and health care
for workers, retirees and their spouses) is factored in, GM's total hourly
labor costs is about $69, while Toyota's is about $48.The
Japanese automaker has fewer retirees in the U.S., and its health care benefits
and pensions are less generous than those negotiated between Detroit and the
UAW. Another key point is that health costs and pensions for auto workers in
Japan - worth billions - are subsidized by the Japanese government. Not so in
the U.S."(CBSnew March 2009)
To "Truthseeker" thanks for supporting me. I am glad to see that even
you agree that most of the Toyota and Honda vehicles are in fact built in the
US.Being a non-union shop they will always be cheaper. Toyota and
Honda don't have to deal with the insane union policies that are well
established as slowing productivity on the assembly lines.
Redshirt1701Deep Space 9, Ut1. Truthseeker is not supporting
you, but refuting you.2. I worked with Toyota executives.
Toyota provides on-site housing, childcare, schools, grocery stores, hopitals,
clinics, resturants, and movie theaters as part of their "compensation".
Kind of the Mitilitary does for service men and women.It's how
"socialist" organizations pay low wages (service men making $600 a month
in wages) but provide a decent "living expense".It also instills
company "loyalty" - something American Capitalists hate.3.
Toyota is the parent company - all sales and proceedes go to Japan.4. Japan is heavily unionized. So your arguement about Toyota and Honda not
being Union is pure tripe.
To "airnaut" you realize that the "company store" was an idea
that has been arond long before socialism, and does not instill loyalty. Think
back to the coal mines with the company towns. That isn't socialism that
is business setting up a system that makes leaving hard.I never said
that Toyota and Honea are not unionized. I said that the US built cars and
trucks are not built by Unions and cost a lot less, and will always cost less
than a union built vehicle.
Everything must be forced from a liberals point of view. There is no freedom of
choice in progressive ideology. Any good progressive will tell you all about
choice and as long as your choice agrees with their choice ... you are fine.
Taxes are the very foundation of liberalism yet taxes were one of the prime
reasons we choose to rebel and fight against King George. Go figure..
What do you mean by 'cost' Redshirt? Similarly equipped accords,
camrys, fusions, and malibus sell for the substantially the same price here in
LA. So what good does it do me if Honda and Toyota send more profits back to
Japan rather than give their employees more money to spend here in the USA?
Redshirt1701Deep Space 9, UtI never said that Toyota and Honea
are not unionized. I said that the US built cars and trucks are not built by
Unions and cost a lot less, and will always cost less than a union built
vehicle.2:16 p.m. April 5, 2013===========You are right.Toyota and Honda Union build cars and trucks are more
expensive...And they only off-loaded the easiest products to build
here.BTW - the engines and transmissions are still built in the
Japanese plants.as an old Free Market saying goes: You get
what your pay for.
"Being a non-union shop they will always be cheaper."Toyota
and Honda are cheaper? Hmnn. I guess you didn't do too many price
L WhiteSpringville, UT2:11 p.m. April 4, 2013 Oh well.
Charity suffereth long so those of us who do not think that the government has
any business pretending to be God's helper will have to suffer their
insolence. ========= Giggle, snork, hahaha!...the
audacity.I find that comment completely outrageous, coming
from someone taking Government Charity (Social Security and Medicare) --
"Everything must be forced from a liberals point of view. There is no
freedom of choice in progressive ideology. Any good progressive will tell you
all about choice and as long as your choice agrees with their choice ... you are
fine. Taxes are the very foundation of liberalism yet taxes were one of the
prime reasons we choose to rebel and fight against King George. Go
figure.."Okay, "patriot", everything you just said here
is wrong. I mean everything. No, no, I mean every single claim you made was
false. I keep rereading it trying to see where I want to respond, and I just
can't do it. Its too amazing, its like a work of art. Congratulations. Its
just too perfect an example of ignorance. Really, good work.
@MarkPatriot's comments need no response as they are obviously
the ad hominem attacks of a person with no logical arguments to make.
Nobody is forcing you to live here so you aren't being forced to pay any
taxes. Simple logic is often the hardest thing for conservatives to
If paying taxes is charity then it is the only charity in the world that if you
don't pay up, you will be put in jail and your property confiscated. I
don't mind paying taxes, I just object to waste, the almost universal
creation of dependency, inefficiency and worthless duplication and calling it
re: Baron Scarpia on 1st page"America was built on
taxes."No. America started out w/ tariffs, etc... It was until
the 16th amendment ratified in 1913 that income tax was made the law of the
land. Ironically, this was roughly the same time the Fed was created.
When people say we want smaller government we do not mean we want no army,
roads, or police. What we don't want is the government subsidizing private
companies(GM, Solyndra, TARP). My construction business paid lots of tax and
didnt receive a dime of relief when the housing market crashed. The government
has created a mess in housing with FHA loans(which I benefit from but everyone
else pays an inflated price), Wall Street by insuring bank deposits, and student
loans by guaranteeing them. Cost of education has exploded. Healthcare costs
are insane since government got involved. Why have procedures like breast
implants and LASIK come down in price dramatically but a 4 stitch wound costs
800 bucks. Guess which procedures operate in free market. I believe
in funding a federal military, but I do not believe in social security or
Medicare. I'm young and neither will have any money when I'm of age so
I save and manage my finances accordingly just as everyone would be forced to do
if these programs didn't exist.