SunsetLament: I would start to believe the media
Gaseous Anomaly: jigger: mrshowrules: Well it is constitutional so anyone who thought it wasn't was clearly wrong.Says 5 people in black dresses.Who happen to be the designated arbiters of what's constitutional.Are you saying we need a Supremer Court?There is a check on the Supreme Court, the justices can be impeached. If their ruling is plainly blatantly contrary to the Constitution then impeaching them should be easy, right?
jigger: Tigger: If the Constitution clearly bans us from providing something that every single other Western Civilization operating today can do without much fuss then the farking problem is the Constitution.Propose an amendment.
Daily reminder: The GOP's backing of the tax plan pushed by the loser of the presidential election is not a concession.- Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) November 27, 2012
o5iiawah: Philip Francis Queeg: The word "military" is not used in the Constitution. It only refers to Armies and Navies specifically. I'm sure a strict constitutionalists like you will agree that the Air Force as it is now established is wholly unconstitutional and should be abolished. You wouldn't want to see the Founders clear specific words interpreted to include other things.With the stroke of a pen, the air force could be absorbed into the Army Air Corps and Naval Air command. One could argue also that the air force supports the Army and Navy and is thus constitutional.the "General welfare" on its own doesn't exist. it is defined by the enumerated powers. If General welfare was supposed to be an overarching, open-ended power, why did Madison bother to enumerate 18 powers of congress?
MattStafford: , if we continue on our current path it is going to stop being an option and simply become reality.
hasty ambush: Philip Francis Queeg: Please show me where the US Constitution enumerates that the federal Government has the power to create an Air Force. Please also indicate where it enumerates that they may maintain an Air Traffic Control system.Air traffic control comes in two parts. First it is part of treaties ratified by the US which then have the same power as the Constitution itself and tow to regulate commerce between the states as the does the FCC etc.The USAF comes under the enumerated powers to raise , fund and regulate (all enumerated not general) the military it can also define organizational structure hence the department of the Air Force. You might argue it says nothing about airplanes but it also says nothing about horses, bayonets or Johnny cakes.If your going to argue food stamps comes under general welfare you as well argue that the Patriot Act or unlimited detention comes under the common defense
Zasteva: Good, then lets stop spending on the booze (unproductive military) and raise taxes on highly excess income (above $250,000 year) to pay for the hookers (retired elderly, welfare). Oh, and pay our bills (interest on the debt).
mcwehrle: MattStafford:The elderly produce very little, and the vast majority of money is spent on their final, completely unproductive years.)MattStafford:Well, we're spending it on keeping our unproductive, retired elderly alive, maintaining an unproductive military, servicing interest on the debt, and as welfare to the poor. I'm not arguing that these aren't important things for a country to spend money ondafuq?Tell ya what. Fark you and any elderly in your family, let's go with that. YOU FIRST.And I'll even volunteer to drive your sorry ass into the wildnerness and drop you off when you hit 70.farkyoufarkyoufarkyou and the horse you rode in on, and welcome to ignore, you ignorant fark.
Zasteva: Good, then lets stop spending on the booze (unproductive military) and raise taxes on highly excess income (above $250,000 year) to pay for the hookers (retired elderly, welfare). Oh, and pay our bills (interest on the debt).Which is pretty much what the Dems evil socialists want to do, and what the GOP Baby Jesus is resisting.
thurstonxhowell: MattStafford: Just so everyone is aware, the argument you guys are making is: if the individual spends at least some money on education and investing in himself, it is perfectly fine to continue spending the vast majority of his money on booze and hookers. Which is a farking dumb argument.Congratulations. You wrote that. Good job.
MattStafford: Philip Francis Queeg: That's right folks, keeping grandma from starving to death is exactly the same as spending on booze and hookers.In terms of how much it helps the economy? Yeah, they are rather similar. How does keeping grandma alive in a nursing home from when she is 70 to when she is 80 help the economy?And if you argue it creates a health care industry...well guess the fark what. Once we are forced to stop spending money on grandma, that health care industry dies along with it. There is no long term gain to keeping grandma alive.
MattStafford: Just so everyone is aware, the argument you guys are making is:
tony41454: Because Dems are idiots who want to break America's bank. It's not the Republicans that have gotten us into this mess, it's the liberal spendthrifts.
Rain-Monkey: Because they have said all along they would be willing to cut spending programs as a part of a balanced package?
Dusk-You-n-Me: MattStafford: Do you think it would be financially prudent for that individual to borrow as much money as humanly possible and spend it on booze and hookers?Yes, we should borrow while rates are zero or near zero. We should not spend it on booze and hookers.
Dr Dreidel: What other SCOTUS decisions shall we ignore because their ceremonial robes are silly? Wickard/Filburn? Kelo/New London? Roe/Wade? Miranda/Arizona? Marbury/Madison (which would be HILARIOUS)? Brown/Board of Ed? Dover/Kitzmiller? Flynt/Falwell?
Dusk-You-n-Me: jst3p: If we only had some real world example that shows that austerity measures can make "bad" into "worse"Ayup. We should fix our stubbornly high unemployment problem and extraordinary income inequality. Fix those, you'll fix revenues, you'll fix the deficit and the debt. Not the other way around.
MattStafford: Has anyone around here come out in favor of the fiscal cliff?
MattStafford: I'm entirely for it!
MattStafford: Any attempt to push it off is just going to make the next cliff we run into even more precipitous.
MattStafford: we are going to be forced to both raise taxes and cut spending, there is no way around that. The fiscal cliff both raises taxes and cuts spending. It is better for us to do it now than a year from now.
Carth: The Romney/Ryan plan of fixing the budget through closing loopholes and getting rid of reductions was overwhelming rejected by voters in favor of Obama's plan of raising marginal tax rates on incomes over 250k. In response to this defeat republics decide their position should be to fix the budget they will only get rid of loop holes and deductions.
Fart_Machine: In other words it's Judicial Activism when I don't agree with the ruling.
CPT Ethanolic: As anyone who's studied the federal budget knows, the problem isn't too little taxes. Even if we kept all the Bush tax cuts in place, federal revenues as a share of GDP will soon exceed historic averages.Uhmm... HUH?? Do these historical averages include the time before income taxes or something?
jigger: mrshowrules: Because he knew Obamacare would be deemed unconstitutional.Anyone who thought that it was a forgone conclusion that the mandate would be overturned severely underestimates the Supreme Court's ability to twist the constitution and previous case law.
tenpoundsofcheese: because for the dems, improving the budget overages by 10% via taxes is a bigger class warfare win than dealing with the other 90% of the budget overages
FlashHarry: Rain-Monkey: Because they have said all along they would be willing to cut spending programs as a part of a balanced package?done in one.and, oh yeah, THE FISCAL CLIFF IS 100 PERCENT THE FAULT OF REPUBLICANS.
If you like these links, you'll love
$5 a month since 19 aught diddly.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 23 2018 02:14:35
Runtime: 0.512 sec (512 ms)