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.
Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by Whereweheaded
Infowars is not a news source. It is idealogical fiction.
We are not in a "nanny state"...the US ranks far...far...down on the list when it comes to social safety nets, healthcare benefits etc.
"Nanny State" sure is catchy though.
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I stand corrected, Article I Section 8 Clause I covers it!
en.wikipedia.org...
Plus adheres to the Preamble's clause of "To form a more perfect union" clearly allows for the creation of social programs.
A General Welfare clause is a section that appears in many constitutions, as well as in some charters and statutes, which provides that the governing body empowered by the document may enact laws as it sees fit to promote or provide for the general welfare of the people. In some countries, this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
this has been used as a basis for legislation
Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by Whereweheaded
Infowars is not a news source. It is idealogical fiction.
We are not in a "nanny state"...the US ranks far...far...down on the list when it comes to social safety nets, healthcare benefits etc.
"Nanny State" sure is catchy though.
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by Whereweheaded
Infowars is not a news source. It is idealogical fiction.
We are not in a "nanny state"...the US ranks far...far...down on the list when it comes to social safety nets, healthcare benefits etc.
"Nanny State" sure is catchy though.
Infowars has way more credibility then every single msm outlet combined as they are not owned nor are accountable to TPTB!
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I stand corrected, Article I Section 8 Clause I covers it!
en.wikipedia.org...
Plus adheres to the Preamble's clause of "To form a more perfect union" clearly allows for the creation of social programs.
BWAHAHA!!!! Did you actually just suggest the general welfare clause? lol
[General welfare clause]
Under article 1 section 8:
A General Welfare clause is a section that appears in many constitutions, as well as in some charters and statutes, which provides that the governing body empowered by the document may enact laws as it sees fit to promote or provide for the general welfare of the people. In some countries, this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
Now take a moment to read the fine print:
this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
No where in the text does it suggest establishing social welfare that allows for a user to stay on state funded money there entire lives. It specifically discusses those in need of health issues, ( ie Medicare /Medicaid), safety, ( thats a given ), and morals , ( which really has nothing to do with this clause, just something those emotionally driven liberals threw in there )
Further, if you look even deeper, you will this:
this has been used as a basis for legislation
see the keyword? " Basis".
Now onto your source, The Preamble.
You do know that the Preamble is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution's fundamental purposes and guiding principles. And as it refers, it sets the precedence to the Constitution, and the laws that govern.
The " Union" in no way shape of form suggests social welfare! Nice try cup cake!
It is suggested that the "Union" was made "more perfect" by the creation of a federal government with enough power to act directly upon citizens. Now we all know full well what happens when government gets to big for their britches, but thats another topic. But no where in the text of the preamble does it suggest social welfare programs, much less suggest staying on state funded paychecks for the duration of ones life!
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by Whereweheaded
Infowars is not a news source. It is idealogical fiction.
We are not in a "nanny state"...the US ranks far...far...down on the list when it comes to social safety nets, healthcare benefits etc.
"Nanny State" sure is catchy though.
Infowars has way more credibility then every single msm outlet combined as they are not owned nor are accountable to TPTB!
Thomas Jefferson explained the latter general welfare clause for the United States: “[T]he laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”
"enact laws as it sees fit to promote or provide for the general welfare of the people. "
this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
Sorry, but ya got nothing:
"enact laws as it sees fit to promote or provide for the general welfare of the people. "
Read again, enact laws to provide for the welfare of the people as stated in the text.
this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder
laws that directly impact those listed above.
Yeah, I did that to your argument!
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
Reading comprehension is obviously not your strongest suit is it? Read the text. Your argument, or lack there of, is only further solidifying the text..
The laws enacted represent the people governed thereunder. Not what you " hoped " it to be much less want it to be!
Would seem you got yourself, with the lack of simple comprehension, ..you sure you graduated high school?edit on 16-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
The Nanny State Can't Last
www.infowars.com
Ron Paul
Last week, Congress and the administration refused to seriously consider the problem of government spending.
Nanny State can't last... Heck, I thought you were talking about China. China is doing GREAT and spends twice as much per capita on subsidizing their population than the US does.
China subsidizes:
Labors housing (massive housing complexes- govt built and maintained)
Labors transportation (high speed wifie'd rail everywhere - cheap to travel)
Labors energy (Chinese govt subidizes workers energy bills)
Labors health care (free)
Labors education (free)
Compared to that- I don't know how anyone can call the U.S. a 'Nanny State'.
Actually - the availability of a healthy, housed, educated and fed labor force is why companies are in China in the first place.
You can't pay labor socialized wages in a capitalist system. You can't have it both ways.
Right now- Chinas socialist system is obviously winning the race.
.
edit on 16-4-2011 by Stratus9 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
Implementing big words does nothing for your education, just means you use " fancy " words to sound important.
Still does nothing for your argument, or lack there of!
Unlike you I actually and proficient enough to know how to accurately use them. So sorry. Your claim is baselss.
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Unlike you I actually and proficient enough to know how to accurately use them. So sorry. Your claim is baselss.edit on 16-4-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
Unlike you I actually and proficient enough to know how to accurately use them. So sorry. Your claim is baselss.
I thought you just said you were proficient in the skills of reading and spelling. Considering you just stated your profound ability of reading, and big word usage at such an early age?
And yet you can't seem to spell baseless right? Baseless, not Baselss!
Just solidified your ignorance there cup cake!
Unlike you I actually and proficient enough to know how to accurately use them.