Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Federal Government's Functions
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jul 22, 2013 21:17:00   #
Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA
 
Folks, we need to examine an issue that comes up time and time again in this forum, and that is the role of the federal government in promoting the well-being of the people.

Some of you are rabidly against the federal government doing almost anything but protecting our shores from foreign invasion. My own position about this is that is a silly phobia and an unwise drag that prevents increasing the well-being of the people.

What really is an acceptable role for the federal government ? I ask you because I would like to examine the whole spectrum of opinions (and that's quite a spectrum !), see what the various arguments are, and refine my own opinion (and maybe yours, though that is doubtful).

The federal government has accomplished an amazing number of things that improve EVERYONE's well-being, and that private enterprise and/or state governments either would not or could not achieve on their own.

How about the intrastate highway system ? That's one. The Tennessee Valley Authority? How about that bit of social engineering that brought millions and millions up from poverty and into the middle class, the G.I. Bill, right after World War II and for decades since then. Programs providing food for children who are on the edge of starvation ?

We have lots of problems right now, but the fact is that government can stimulate activity on important fronts, and (I maintain) should when inactivity threatens us all. I take as an excellent example the issue of climate change. Let's look at one particular application of federal stimulus that could affect us all for the better by keeping food prices down. Look at this article that just came out in The New York Times about climate change, the food supply, and what could be done to maintain or increase our supply of food (and maintain at present levels or lower food's cost) as our climate becomes more and more warm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/our-coming-food-crisis.html?pagewanted=2&nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130722

Doesn't the looming climate situation justify federal action on this front ? If not, why not ? What do you think the effect on inactivity will be on YOU ? Here's a whole list of things that could be accomplished by the federal government that would better the situation of everybody.

Since so many of the Republican members of Congress would surely block any government efforts to improve our situation in the face of coming climate adversity, and since private enterprise is unlikely to accomplish most of these changes, isn't the stance of the Republican Party foolish and counter to the general well-being ?

At what point do you think the Federal government should act ?

Reply
Jul 22, 2013 21:34:40   #
Miriam
 
I agree with you but what can we do when we have the best government that money can buy and their dupes make the most noise?

Reply
Jul 22, 2013 21:49:01   #
Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA
 
That is perhaps the major problem in today's government -- our leaders are bought and sold. Campaign Finance Reforrn would help a lot, but our Congress would never allow it.


Miriam wrote:
I agree with you but what can we do when we have the best government that money can buy and their dupes make the most noise?

Reply
 
 
Jul 22, 2013 22:18:53   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
We need the federal government to stand up to and limit the power of big corporations.

I think privatizing services that have been traditionally run by the federal government is a big mistake, as it is foolish to think corporations will do much for the needs of the public. Maximizing profits is and always will be a corporation's sole objective, not what is best for the people. And once a government service has been privatized, it will be very difficult to undo.

Reply
Jul 22, 2013 23:54:51   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
Richard94611 wrote:
Folks, we need to examine an issue that comes up time and time again in this forum, and that is the role of the federal government in promoting the well-being of the people.

Some of you are rabidly against the federal government doing almost anything but protecting our shores from foreign invasion. My own position about this is that is a silly phobia and an unwise drag that prevents increasing the well-being of the people.

What really is an acceptable role for the federal government ? I ask you because I would like to examine the whole spectrum of opinions (and that's quite a spectrum !), see what the various arguments are, and refine my own opinion (and maybe yours, though that is doubtful).

The federal government has accomplished an amazing number of things that improve EVERYONE's well-being, and that private enterprise and/or state governments either would not or could not achieve on their own.

How about the intrastate highway system ? That's one. The Tennessee Valley Authority? How about that bit of social engineering that brought millions and millions up from poverty and into the middle class, the G.I. Bill, right after World War II and for decades since then. Programs providing food for children who are on the edge of starvation ?

We have lots of problems right now, but the fact is that government can stimulate activity on important fronts, and (I maintain) should when inactivity threatens us all. I take as an excellent example the issue of climate change. Let's look at one particular application of federal stimulus that could affect us all for the better by keeping food prices down. Look at this article that just came out in The New York Times about climate change, the food supply, and what could be done to maintain or increase our supply of food (and maintain at present levels or lower food's cost) as our climate becomes more and more warm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/our-coming-food-crisis.html?pagewanted=2&nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130722

Doesn't the looming climate situation justify federal action on this front ? If not, why not ? What do you think the effect on inactivity will be on YOU ? Here's a whole list of things that could be accomplished by the federal government that would better the situation of everybody.

Since so many of the Republican members of Congress would surely block any government efforts to improve our situation in the face of coming climate adversity, and since private enterprise is unlikely to accomplish most of these changes, isn't the stance of the Republican Party foolish and counter to the general well-being ?

At what point do you think the Federal government should act ?
Folks, we need to examine an issue that comes up t... (show quote)


At the risk of instigating another pointless argument with you, may I suggest that you read the entire content of Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution which details the full delegated authority of the federal government. Then as the dessert to that main course, top it off by reading the tenth amendment, which clearly states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So after reading A1-S8 and keeping the tenth amendment in mind. What authority does the federal government have to do the things you ask about?

The left seems to interpret the phrase about promoting the general welfare to mean to promote welfare in general. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The only authority it has has been usurped through corruption and graft.

In addition to the Constitution, I have long been a student of the founders, especially Thomas Jefferson who had the following to say that is point on about the liberal misunderstanding of the general welfare clause. "To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, "to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare." For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They 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." --Thomas Jefferson: 1791. ME 3:147

So to answer your question, I want the Federal government reigned in to the bounds of its design, all the rest of this stuff, the personal welfare, environmental laws, those are all states issues, and should be dealt with by the individual states as they see fit. Remember the states created the federal government, not the other way around, so having the federal government telling the states what to do and basically bribing them with their own money is little different than a child bullying his parents and the parents are too afraid of their criminal child to stop it. I sincerely hope that that reversal happens soon.

Reply
Jul 22, 2013 23:58:56   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
Richard94611 wrote:
That is perhaps the major problem in today's government -- our leaders are bought and sold. Campaign Finance Reforrn would help a lot, but our Congress would never allow it.


Can you say term limits for congress? 2 terms per office, period. It would clean out the lifelong politicians and open things up to citizen legislators, as the founders intended. No special retirement packages for life, it's called Public Service. Not mu home on the public trough.

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 01:22:19   #
Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY
 
Richard94611 wrote:
That is perhaps the major problem in today's government -- our leaders are bought and sold. Campaign Finance Reforrn would help a lot, but our Congress would never allow it.


Nor would our President:

Obama’s campaign finance reform plans have faded

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-29/politics/38902141_1_president-obama-advocacy-group-fec

Reply
 
 
Jul 23, 2013 02:12:23   #
TucsonCoyote Loc: Tucson AZ
 
Richard94611 wrote:
Folks, we need to examine an issue that comes up time and time again in this forum, and that is the role of the federal government in promoting the well-being of the people.

Some of you are rabidly against the federal government doing almost anything but protecting our shores from foreign invasion. My own position about this is that is a silly phobia and an unwise drag that prevents increasing the well-being of the people.

What really is an acceptable role for the federal government ? I ask you because I would like to examine the whole spectrum of opinions (and that's quite a spectrum !), see what the various arguments are, and refine my own opinion (and maybe yours, though that is doubtful).

The federal government has accomplished an amazing number of things that improve EVERYONE's well-being, and that private enterprise and/or state governments either would not or could not achieve on their own.

How about the intrastate highway system ? That's one. The Tennessee Valley Authority? How about that bit of social engineering that brought millions and millions up from poverty and into the middle class, the G.I. Bill, right after World War II and for decades since then. Programs providing food for children who are on the edge of starvation ?

We have lots of problems right now, but the fact is that government can stimulate activity on important fronts, and (I maintain) should when inactivity threatens us all. I take as an excellent example the issue of climate change. Let's look at one particular application of federal stimulus that could affect us all for the better by keeping food prices down. Look at this article that just came out in The New York Times about climate change, the food supply, and what could be done to maintain or increase our supply of food (and maintain at present levels or lower food's cost) as our climate becomes more and more warm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/our-coming-food-crisis.html?pagewanted=2&nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130722

Doesn't the looming climate situation justify federal action on this front ? If not, why not ? What do you think the effect on inactivity will be on YOU ? Here's a whole list of things that could be accomplished by the federal government that would better the situation of everybody.

Since so many of the Republican members of Congress would surely block any government efforts to improve our situation in the face of coming climate adversity, and since private enterprise is unlikely to accomplish most of these changes, isn't the stance of the Republican Party foolish and counter to the general well-being ?

At what point do you think the Federal government should act ?
Folks, we need to examine an issue that comes up t... (show quote)

I was going to sit back and maybe watch Richard94611 and his kinfolk make asses of themselves without any help from anybody, but since heyrob decided to ream them a new one with brilliance, I thought I would just join in with a few kicks of my own.

Never got a chance to read to the end because the first couple of items boasted about are wrong and or incorrect!

The Intrastate roadways have nothing to do with the federal government ! The OP shouldn't have tried using cool words he does not understand the meaning of!(always check yourself before pulling your pants up....and also look up Intrastate vs Interstate !)

Next: The Tennessee Valley Authority although heartwarming as it may seem to some touchy feelie folks is just a major disaster that has been cooking since the early 70s !
And "As of 2013, TVA carries $25 billion in debt, near the $30 billion debt limit imposed by Congress."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority

I won't go any further because my 2 cents is now worth $37 and some change !

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 03:12:33   #
Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA
 
You're right about interstate and intrastate. I should have reread what I wrote more carefully. My apologies. (I do know the difference between the two terms.) The fact remains that the federal government was responsible for the construction of the Interstate Highway System, which has done enormous good for all the people of the United States.

Obviously are values differ. You would rather value finances and the bottom line and balancing the budget than the well-being of the people. The Tennessee Valley Authority accomplished an enormous amount for the general well-bring of the people.

That you are far more concerned with budget than the well-being of the people is obvious from your posts. Those are your value judgments. This discussion brings out that fact.

You are clearly in the minority here. Part of my value system includes the belief that the federal government should legitimately be used to increase the well-being of the people. You don't agree. As can be seen from the way people have voted in the last 100+ years, more people believe in my values than yours. Get used to it.


TucsonCoyote wrote:
I was going to sit back and maybe watch Richard94611 and his kinfolk make asses of themselves without any help from anybody, but since heyrob decided to ream them a new one with brilliance, I thought I would just join in with a few kicks of my own.

Never got a chance to read to the end because the first couple of items boasted about are wrong and or incorrect!

The Intrastate roadways have nothing to do with the federal government ! The OP shouldn't have tried using cool words he does not understand the meaning of!(always check yourself before pulling your pants up....and also look up Intrastate vs Interstate !)

Next: The Tennessee Valley Authority although heartwarming as it may seem to some touchy feelie folks is just a major disaster that has been cooking since the early 70s !
And "As of 2013, TVA carries $25 billion in debt, near the $30 billion debt limit imposed by Congress."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority

I won't go any further because my 2 cents is now worth $37 and some change !
I was going to sit back and maybe watch Richard946... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 03:19:36   #
Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA
 
The reversal you hope for is not going to happen. The federal government will continue to tax and will continue to use those taxes in a way that promotes the general well-being of the people. But it is good to know that if a comet were coming towards the United States and could be averted by NASA that you would prefer NASA not to act, but to have states do this for themselves, even if they didn't have the wherewithal required.

The trend has been and will continue to be to have the federal government act to promote the general well-bring of the people. This seems to be what the people wish for, as shown by elections.

But it is good to have your unwise and mean-spirited values spread out once again for all to see.



heyrob wrote:
At the risk of instigating another pointless argument with you, may I suggest that you read the entire content of Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution which details the full delegated authority of the federal government. Then as the dessert to that main course, top it off by reading the tenth amendment, which clearly states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So after reading A1-S8 and keeping the tenth amendment in mind. What authority does the federal government have to do the things you ask about?

The left seems to interpret the phrase about promoting the general welfare to mean to promote welfare in general. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The only authority it has has been usurped through corruption and graft.

In addition to the Constitution, I have long been a student of the founders, especially Thomas Jefferson who had the following to say that is point on about the liberal misunderstanding of the general welfare clause. "To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, "to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare." For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They 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." --Thomas Jefferson: 1791. ME 3:147

So to answer your question, I want the Federal government reigned in to the bounds of its design, all the rest of this stuff, the personal welfare, environmental laws, those are all states issues, and should be dealt with by the individual states as they see fit. Remember the states created the federal government, not the other way around, so having the federal government telling the states what to do and basically bribing them with their own money is little different than a child bullying his parents and the parents are too afraid of their criminal child to stop it. I sincerely hope that that reversal happens soon.
At the risk of instigating another pointless argum... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 10:16:14   #
rtrpics Loc: WV
 
richard, i'm going to ask you to first reread heyrob's posts... read them slowly and thoughtfully... this is not an attack on yoir i.q., it is an attempt to have you realize the profound importance of the constitution. reading, pondering , and studying is only the beginning.you also need to read and study the history of why and how it came into existance. only then can you begin to appreciate the fact it is our only hope as a nation. once you have reached that point, you can use that knowledge to begin to put into perspective what is needed in this period of our country. but now for the additional knowledge you need to acquire.you must , i repeat must , learn more about our history. you will need to get a basic understanding of the origins of the
"originalists" versus the "living" constitutionalists. that will lead you into a discovery of the progressive movement. then you need to learn about the the president who did more to destroy this country than any other single president. you will find he was very intelligent, very sincere, very effective , very passionate , and very wrong. only in the light of this knowledge can any citizen even begin to see and make sense of our countries dilemma. and if you really want to give yourself a challenge understand the concept of prioritizing. start to study economics, fiscal policy , monetary policy, debts , and deficits. after you understand the basics of those topics and then consider priorities, you will know which topics to concentrate on , if you"d like to. p.s. i intentionally did not talk about remedies or solutions. there are other topics one has to consider priorities 2,3,4,5,etc. once they are itemized and viewed as a whole can wise men start to discuss slutions. p.p.s. i'm only beginning to learn myself.

Reply
 
 
Jul 23, 2013 11:05:44   #
SpeedyWilson Loc: Upstate South Carolina
 
I agree with what Heyrob and a few others have written, and mostly disagree with what Richard94611 has written.

The Federal government has done a few good things, but for the most part it has become too large and too invasive.

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 11:15:40   #
Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA
 
You know what, I appreciate your thoughtful, intelligent post.

As I was going over the various amendments of the Constitution with students in a class this past semester, simply making sure they knew which one is which and what they relate to in their own lives, I certainly pondered the importance of the Constitution. We clearly disagree, you and I, about whether the "originalists" or the "living" constitutionalists show the path that should be followed.

You and I disagree about the "originalist" and the "living" constitutionalists and which one each of us favors. Obviously I feel that although the "originalist" point of view must be the foundation of our democracy, but that the "living" constitutionalist point of view has to be followed. To think that I have not studied the Constitution nor pondered it is an idea generated in your mind because you disagree with my point of view. When you ponder the Constitution, please ponder several things your point of view does not take into account: 1) The social class the Founding Fathers represented. 2) The fact that we live in a different world with many different demands on us than the Founding Fathers had upon them. And while you are pondering these things, you might dip into the first few chapters, and especially Chapter 5, of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.

Do not think that just because you and I value and stress the importance of things differently that I am ignorant of many of the things you know. I know a lot of them and a lot of others, too. One of the things I know is that when people have civil discussions such as the one your post typifies, much can be learned by everybody, and many interests can be considered, weighed, accepted or rejected. That's what democracy is supposed to be about -- not a bunch of name-calling of the sort a number of people in this forum habitually engage in.


\
rtrpics wrote:
richard, i'm going to ask you to first reread heyrob's posts... read them slowly and thoughtfully... this is not an attack on yoir i.q., it is an attempt to have you realize the profound importance of the constitution. reading, pondering , and studying is only the beginning.you also need to read and study the history of why and how it came into existance. only then can you begin to appreciate the fact it is our only hope as a nation. once you have reached that point, you can use that knowledge to begin to put into perspective what is needed in this period of our country. but now for the additional knowledge you need to acquire.you must , i repeat must , learn more about our history. you will need to get a basic understanding of the origins of the
"originalists" versus the "living" constitutionalists. that will lead you into a discovery of the progressive movement. then you need to learn about the the president who did more to destroy this country than any other single president. you will find he was very intelligent, very sincere, very effective , very passionate , and very wrong. only in the light of this knowledge can any citizen even begin to see and make sense of our countries dilemma. and if you really want to give yourself a challenge understand the concept of prioritizing. start to study economics, fiscal policy , monetary policy, debts , and deficits. after you understand the basics of those topics and then consider priorities, you will know which topics to concentrate on , if you"d like to. p.s. i intentionally did not talk about remedies or solutions. there are other topics one has to consider priorities 2,3,4,5,etc. once they are itemized and viewed as a whole can wise men start to discuss slutions. p.p.s. i'm only beginning to learn myself.
richard, i'm going to ask you to first reread heyr... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 11:18:03   #
heyrob Loc: Western Washington
 
Richard94611 wrote:
The reversal you hope for is not going to happen. The federal government will continue to tax and will continue to use those taxes in a way that promotes the general well-being of the people. But it is good to know that if a comet were coming towards the United States and could be averted by NASA that you would prefer NASA not to act, but to have states do this for themselves, even if they didn't have the wherewithal required.

The trend has been and will continue to be to have the federal government act to promote the general well-bring of the people. This seems to be what the people wish for, as shown by elections.
The reversal you hope for is not going to happen. ... (show quote)


You asked a question, I offered an answer without vitriol or hyperbole, and still you twist my words and make a feeble attempt to put words in my mouth that are in no way implied by my response. You claim that if a comet were coming toward earth that my position that even if NASA could do something about it, that I would oppose taxes used for that purpose. This is blatantly untrue and if you read the quote by Jefferson above you’d realize the ineptness of your claim. “They 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. So clearly that which is for the welfare of the union is clearly a just and necessary tax.

Although your statement that “the trend has been and will continue to be to have the federal government act to promote the general well-bring of the people.” May be true, but it is only right and just if it truly benefits ALL the people. If taking from one class of people to give to another class of people, that is not to the benefit of ALL the people and is therefore unjust. Another quote by Jefferson, "To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, —the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.”

So all of this tax the rich crap that liberals all the way up to Obama spout, flies in the face of the principles this country was founded upon.

Richard94611 wrote:
But it is good to have your unwise and mean-spirited values spread out once again for all to see.


You’re so ignorant of the simplest of facts that it would be funny if it weren’t so sad. I believe it is clear to anyone reading this thread that the mean-spirited values are yours to claim, as I espouse only those of the founding fathers. But perhaps you feel they were a bunch of mean guys too. I’m pretty sure that any lack of wisdom in this post is also plainly yours to bear. Your left wing ideology is so pervasive that you are tilting at windmills in your imaginary battle against the vast right wing conspiracy.

Reply
Jul 23, 2013 13:20:34   #
ole sarg Loc: south florida
 
I seem to recall a mythical time when the liberals ran the country with the consent of conservatives and the nation was about to move into surplus.

But, at just that time a conservative came to power and ended the surplus but lined the pockets of his wealthy conservative croonies. And in so doing managed the greatest transfer of wealth in history.

Then all of a sudden there was a collapse of the economy and exploding debt. There was great debate about the world and Europe decided to cut to the bone and went still deeper into debt even with the draconeon cuts, while the US under the brief leadership of a democrat controlled house and senate and Presidency spent and did not cut and is now on the rise while Europe still founders.

The problem seems to be that when right wing ideology meets reality, ideology fails!

A house divided will not stand and the role of the federal government was settled in a bloody war. The clock will not turn back. The interrelationship between the states and the federal government if deep. The call by the states for help when diaster befalls one only reiterates the role of the federal government in the salvation of our union.

There was debate at the founding of the nation between Jefferson and Hamilton and it goes on. I do not think that Jefferson would not endorse Hamilton in light of the urbanization of the nation. We are no longer a nation of individual farmers but rather one of industrial farming and industrial manufacturing. We are urban not rural.

Our current debt is not tied to government spending but to a lack of employment and the accompanying revenue it brings to the treasury in taxes.

The right wing in this country was against the New Deal and the post war fair deal including the GI Bill. They were against the building of highways, dams, electrification, public health, and any and all federal programs that have made us the greatest, wealthiest, and most free nation in the world.

So to my right wing adversaries I say spend now and get our nation back to work. Invest in infrastructure, education and R&D.

To think just 4% growth over a 5 year period eliminates the national debt.

Let it happen in short either lead, follow or get out of the way, but cease and desist from this mythical balooney you espouse as some sort of truth! It is not so!

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.