It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clinton won the Presidency today and I am sad.

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

General welfare, as in if the USA needed welfare more than it's budget, or it's budget more than it's welfare. Generally what is interpreted as the best option. Not excluding individual welfare.

The point is it's interpretative to a high degree, if you're speaking directly about welfare the act, where the government hands out hot pieces of cash.

The country comes first when it needs to, and the citizen essentially comes first, whenever else possible. There is no second, in America.
edit on 3-3-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: ManFromEurope

I agree some people do need to 'educate' themselves.



That is from a website that promotes that woman's book. LOL. Not the woman in the picture, that is a Danish actress. And not even the woman ,mentioned on the website, because she is a writer. No idea who this 'schoolteacher' is. She cannot be found.

Snopes


In short, it's true Denmark's taxes are far higher than those in the United States, but that's offset by significantly reduced costs to citizens for expenditures such as healthcare, education, and child care. A gallon of gas doesn't cost Danes anywhere near $10, but tax on new cars is 180%. We were unable to find any ranking of Denmark as the "highest-taxed" nation in the world (or even just Europe), and home ownership rates are near what they are in the U.S. (There are far more privately-owned vehicles in the United States than Denmark, however.) Denmark's suicide rate is lower than that of the U.S., and antidepressant usage is higher among Americans. Finally, while some young Danes moved abroad due to high taxes on income, we were unable to find any evidence that was the case for companies.

edit on 3-3-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-3-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Really? Think Trump just got much stronger. The Republicans don't like him, which bodes well for him shoring up the independent vote. Kept thinking this may just gave him the Presidency, especially it is goes into a brokered convention.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sharing is what we have charities for.
Taxes ain't sharing; its confiscation.


Considering that the Founder's found it necessary for the public defense to tax the people to provide a military, would you consider the Founders thieves?

I know you didn't pose this one to me...
Provide for a common defense...... Makes sense that there might be a need for money to do that.

General welfare of the United States..... Does not say citizens, and definitely doesn't say individual welfare.


So what do YOU define as the "general welfare of the United States" if the citizenry don't count? Business interests? Banana Republics? That was the name of the game in the past, where most conservatives want to take our country.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: blujack21
Really? Think Trump just got much stronger. The Republicans don't like him, which bodes well for him shoring up the independent vote. Kept thinking this may just gave him the Presidency, especially it is goes into a brokered convention.


What happens if the Republican establishment breaks away from the Republican party and goes for a third party run?



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Barf you sound like one of the Borg.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

I haven't read all the replies so I'm probably repeating sentiment here, but......

It doesn't matter what The Donald's plan is, or Hillary's or Ted Cruz'. Our fate lies with others, TPTB. Don't you remember what Obama originally proposed, "Single Payer"? He didn't get it. He got what TPTB designed, which is ObamaCare.




edit on 3-3-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
That fabulous DELUSION of universal 'healthcare'!

As it stands right now the US government is the largest healthcare insurer in the country today.

There is no single 'private' corporation that has over 100 million people on their rolls,

Medicare,and Medicaid, and Tricare are currently costing us over $1 trillion per YEAR.

Ya know those programs where everyone is using it, hardly ANYONE is paying for it. Which is why there are NEW TAXES to pay for it.

That's how Universal healthcare works.

I do not see how anyone would support the STATE creating a super monopoly on a CORPORATE product.

Anyone who wants 'universal' healthcare deserves the Darwin award.


Americans are slatted to spend 3.3 Trillion on healthcare this year and pays twice as much for coverage that is inferior to
other westernized nations.

When you make profit the main motivation, surely you must understand that the goal is to charge more money, so you can make greater profits. That is the nature of the US system, making money is more important than keeping Americans healthy and free of crushing medical debt.

I know many people in the last decade who have paid upwards of $60,000 for 5 days in the hospital. My uncle was charged $120,000 for 9 days in the hospital back in 2003.

The US private insurance system is a scam IMO



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Right. I have no family I need to be responsible for. The ACA isn't for me, I've known that since day 1. Healthy young people are supposed to pay into it (much more than they need to) and not ask any questions, while at the same time not really utilizing it. This allows all the excess money to go to everyone else who "Needs" it more than me.

That decision that the government makes for me about what to do with the money I spend my life working for is where I have problems.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

A # storm and the Republicans would lose almost every single state. No way would the South side with them and neither would some states in the midwest. Which makes me think this was all for show, to show they don't want Trump and this was their stance against him. They can now say, "the establishment did speak out against him." While washing their hands of who the voters choose. That is the only thing that makes sense.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: blujack21
a reply to: Krazysh0t

A # storm and the Republicans would lose almost every single state. No way would the South side with them and neither would some states in the midwest. Which makes me think this was all for show, to show they don't want Trump and this was their stance against him. They can now say, "the establishment did speak out against him." While washing their hands of who the voters choose. That is the only thing that makes sense.

Be a good way to assure that Trump doesn't win the Presidency though.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy



General welfare of the United States..... Does not say citizens, and definitely doesn't say individual welfare.


The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about semi or fully automatic firearms.

Can you see the fallacy in that line of thinking?
edit on 3-3-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: introvert

Barf you sound like one of the Borg.


Indeed.

After we instill more socialist programs in this country, we will be coming for your children to envelope them in to the collective.

Resistance is futile!



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy



General welfare of the United States..... Does not say citizens, and definitely doesn't say individual welfare.


The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about semi-automatic firearms.

Can you see the fallacy in that line of thinking?

It says general welfare, which is different than individual welfare.
The second says arms, which makes it difficult restrict to a specific.
The Constitution is pretty clear when it speaks of citizens, states, common, general... general means overall... not individuals.
Citizens should get payment from the government for services rendered.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Well, just speaking practically.

A persons basic health is about as General as welfare can get. We are all more likely to get a disease and die than
be attacked and killed by a foreign army.

Just another way our brains have been twisted by profit motive.

How are you? Well I'm dying of a curable disease, but at least I will not be nuked by Sudan!!!

The priorities, MERICA!



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Just curious but, what country do you live in? If you don't mind my asking.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy



General welfare of the United States..... Does not say citizens, and definitely doesn't say individual welfare.


The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about semi-automatic firearms.

Can you see the fallacy in that line of thinking?

It says general welfare, which is different than individual welfare.
The second says arms, which makes it difficult restrict to a specific.
The Constitution is pretty clear when it speaks of citizens, states, common, general... general means overall... not individuals.
Citizens should get payment from the government for services rendered.


I simple don't understand why our government can't be used to make benefit or money for WE THE PEOPLE? Just imagine if the government were working for us and not a few thousand Million and billionaires.


The government should be sending us checks, they work for us and yet they take and take.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   
But Hillary says she will "build upon" and expand Obama.Care.




posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: yesyesyes

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy



General welfare of the United States..... Does not say citizens, and definitely doesn't say individual welfare.


The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about semi-automatic firearms.

Can you see the fallacy in that line of thinking?

It says general welfare, which is different than individual welfare.
The second says arms, which makes it difficult restrict to a specific.
The Constitution is pretty clear when it speaks of citizens, states, common, general... general means overall... not individuals.
Citizens should get payment from the government for services rendered.


I simple don't understand why our government can't be used to make benefit or money for WE THE PEOPLE? Just imagine if the government were working for us and not a few thousand Million and billionaires.


The government should be sending us checks, they work for us and yet they take and take.

Every cent they take is spent and they spend part of it financing the debt for the money that they spent that they didn't have.
The government does pay some people.
Just watch when you are in line to pay for your groceries. More often than not, I see an EBT card come out to pay for others food.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join