Member of the Owlluminati!
Anyway, I think I subscribe to the sort of government Lincoln spoke of in the Gettysburg Address: Government of by the people, by the people, and for the people.
I think we forget that last one a lot of the time.
Visit my Blog.
"I used to want to be pro-life but then I realized I didn't like guns, torture and war enough." - @LOLGOP
Visit my Blog.
"I used to want to be pro-life but then I realized I didn't like guns, torture and war enough." - @LOLGOP
Alright i'll take my shot here...
From the other thread...
This should absolutely have been left up to the states and the federal government never should have gotten into it at all...
A few things to consider:
1) Abortions happen because that's where the morality of the country is at. It has nothing to do with the government, only the morality of the individual.
2) If the law was changed so that abortions were banned women would still find a way to have abortions. Laws and governments do not stop wills or free markets.
3) What is and isn't considered murder is entirely relative to when you believe life begins. Your definition may not be the same as another's and shouldn't be forced onto the entire country no matter what it is.
4) One day I believe medical technology will be able to advance itself to such a degree that women will be able to have abortions while still saving the life of the child- think artificial wombs where the life can be transported. If this day comes there really cannot be any defense to killing a human life no matter what stage the fetus is in.
5) Abortions do help in keeping populations, and crime, in check. In some cases they're absolutely necessary to save the life of the mother. Banning them all together would be ridiculous.
6) However, Abortions have increasingly been used as a form of birth control and totally disrupts our societal view of how precious human life is.
7) In the grand scheme of things it's a pretty unimportant issue all together despite the fact it's the single greatest wedge issue in American politics- 250 trillion in unfunded liabilities, a relentless assault on our personal liberties through a steady growth in the police state, military and economic interventionism with no end in sight, and a unit of currency with no limit that makes it all possible, should all be greater concerns to us than what a woman should be allowed to do with her own body and how she should be able to conceive of her own morality.
The answer for all these social issues is in the 10th amendment, the federal government really should not have had any say on this matter and if we let Pro-Life states ban abortion and Pro-Choice states expand even to 3rd trimester abortions we'd all get to see and observe the effects of both policies- our observations would cause us to easily identify the pros and cons to both policies and would make it easier to imagine better systems than both.
It's this constant clashing at the state level that would allow our country, as a whole, to evolve itself to the best possible outcome. When we allow the federal government to institute a 1-size fits all policy to the entire nation we've robbed ourselves of that evolution and of our ability to observe what the outcomes of both policies would have been.
I'm totally against a socialist state, run by an unbacked currency, with abhorrent tax rates, massive regulations, and constant invasions of privacy. But I would not be against such a thing if a state's people approved all of it and left me the option to move to another state where the exact opposite was occurring. The same evolutionary process could be played out with anything whether it be abortions or economics if we just allowed the states their proper sovereignty in relation to the federal government.
We have to find a way to get ourselves off of it but this is no easily task and must be handled delicately. I think it's pretty safe to say the welfare/warfare state in this country is what's bankrupting this nation. Now, if you believe in real Liberty then you understand a huge basis of that federally is protection of property rights, contract rights, and instituting a government that protects heavily against Fraud. If you believe in a government that protects against fraud and enforces contract rights than you must take the position that people who have paid into welfare deserve to either keep what they've paid into the system or should be allowed to keep their welfare as it comes to them. These were implied promises made to the people and programs citizens WERE FORCED into paying.
The only solution to make these programs solvent again is to end our military adventurism around the world. We're broke and that's our single largest expense. If we significantly reduced our military empire around the world we could make these programs solvent again which would make it considerably easier to ween ourselves off of the welfare dependency over the coming decades.
We can cut both the welfare and warfare state but it's the war machine that has to be reduced first.
No argument can be had without the role of unsound money being mentioned. August 15th 1971... that's the day when the last remnants of the gold standard were abolished completely. If you go back and look at any financial graph that's when our entire mess began... the massive boom/bust cycles we've been experiencing were identified and predicted by people like Mises and Hayek decades prior. A totally fiat system is destined to wipe out the middle class and collapse the currency- you cannot find a single instance in history where a fiat monetary standard did not cause this and it's what we're experiencing RIGHT NOW. A true gold standard is the people's defense against an ever growing state and is the only way to get governments to tax and spend correctly. When we give the government the power to just create currency out of thin air we give them the ability to bail themselves, or their friends, out of any situation by destroying the purchasing power of currency that already exists. This not only subverts our own labor for dollars but it subverts the beauty of real capitalism.
The inflation tax is the most deceitful, misunderstood, and destructive tax there is. The Federal Reserve's ability to manipulate market interest rates, change reserve ratios at the banks, and buy bonds directly from the Treasury grossly distorts market signals and sets up for a massive malinvestment of capital. The boom phase is always prosperous, but when the realization is made that a lot of the capital that was invested was put into sectors that's growth was illusory to begin with the preceding bust is much worse- we've seen this clearly over the past 15 years with the tech bubble, the nasdaq bubble, and the housing bubble. Worse yet is when the bust occurs the same people that got us into this mess have no other solution other than to print more money and re-inflate the bubbles just to jump start the economy- this technique has been tried for centuries and it eventually reaches a point where such a massive amount of newly created currency does nothing and long-term stagflation sets in. We've tripled the base money supply over the past 5 years but we've seen almost no economic growth. After 41 years we've hit our limit with this system.
And that should not all together be surprising as most monterary standards do not last more than 30-40 years unless they are strict gold standards. From 1879 to 1913 we had an almost true gold standard but not quite, this gave way to the gold exchange standard that existed between 1913 and 1933, in 1933 gold ownership was banned in the US and dollar redemption in gold was suspended domestically. In 1947 the nations of the world adopted the Bretton-Woods standard which at the time was predicted to fail by guys like Hazlitt and Hayek, and it finally did come crumbling apart in August of 1971 when the rest of the world made a run on our gold. From 1971 to now we've had a totally worldwide fiat standard- a system that has ALWAYS lead to economic collapse is now being followed by the entire globe with reckless disregard.
We're due for a new monetary standard and when the time comes that people are forced into picking a new one it's my great hope that people rise up for a true gold standard- one that is not fractionally reserved (as was the case with the gold standard prior to the Federal Reserve's inception) and one that isn't just recognized internationally (as was the case in Bretton Woods).
If we stopped all subsidies to oil and let real competition thrive in the marketplace I think we'd eventually get the energy we've all been waiting for- clean and efficient. The problem we face today is we've disguised corporatism as capitalism- which turns people off to both corporate growth and true capitalism. We aren't going to see real change in technological places that matter unless we break the government/business partnership that has been drastically increased over the last 30 years- coincidentally enough this partnership has grown greater and with much ease due to the lack of monetary restraint. Unsound money really is the root of all our issues.
The government must offer some kind of education to people that can't afford it but I subscribe to Ron Paul's ideas on education which is that the Federal Department of Education has no business existing and each state should be able to decide what process they're going to follow - whether it be strict private comptetion or a strict public system it really doesn't matter. The same evolutionary process I pointed out in the abortion argument would work at the state level for anything- including education.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Ben Franklin
To give up liberty for protection means to give up liberty to higher authority that is supposed to protect you and your family. More often than not the power you give to these people is eventually abused- slowly but surely- and the police state grows to such a degree that it becomes the real enemy of liberty- one that's eventually impossible to subdue.
I also think if you really sit down and take a long hard historical look at the threats we face today you'll inevitably come to the conclusion nearly all of our enemies are our enemies because of the actions our CIA and Government have taken over the last 60 years.
Probably the most complicated issue in America today. The one thing i'd like to point out is prior to government involvement into healthcare during the 1960s insurance rates as well as medical costs we're considerably cheaper than they are today- even with inflation adjusted. The reason we've dug ourselves such a hole is because governments always increase costs- only the private sector is truly looking out for cost savings to pass onto the consumer so they can better compete with other companies. Government institutions are legitimized monopolies that are allowed to give us sub service in whatever it provides- this is the reason most government institutions are slow as hell and totally incompetent. We just accept this incompetence as part of America but 90% of what the government does domestically could be done by the private sector more effectively and without tax payer support.
A strong national defense is key to the survival of any nation. It's better to stock up on weapons of defense than weapons of offense. Nukes, contrary to the stigma, have essentially created more peace than war. How likely is it that we would have let the Cold War remain cold if neither side had nukes? Mutually assured destruction is one of the great providers of peace on earth and it absolutely makes sense countries like Iran are trying to get them- the thing about nukes is anyone who has them doesn't get attacked.
Stem Cell Research
In a free society there would be no restrictions on research of any kind so long as it was not unconstitutional. Innovation is what made this country great and it's what increases the standard of living for us all.
What i'm against are taxes of force. The income tax would be considered a tax of force- if you don't pay it you go to jail. Sometimes tax evaders are given harsher sentences than rapists.
Consumption taxes, and voluntary taxes should absolutely exist but the beauty in those is that the people don't have to pay them if they don't want. If you don't want to pay sales tax then don't buy anything, if you can't survive without buying stuff then pay your sales tax. There's a conscience decision that can be made in regards to these types of taxes, people are not forced in any way to pay them.
Taxes of force should be banished, and the income tax in particular is the worst offender. It's sends the message that a percentage of your time every year is spent working for the government- they own you and they own the fruits of your labor- is not a message that should be sent in a free society. We should also not be subject to filing our taxes every year and letting the government sift through everything we bought and sold- in a free society they shouldn't have the right to peak into what we're buying and selling. It should be no coincidence to anyone that the IRS and Federal Reserve were created in the same year. Monitoring over finances and monopoly control over money will only result in greater control over the individual American.
A strict adherence to private property rights would give individuals the ability to sue anyone or anything that pollutes their land. A lot of these private property protections were lost during the industrial revolution. But it used to be that if a factory was polluting your air quality, you could sue, if someone was dumping waste upstream and polluting your section down stream you could sue. Now we have public domain laws where the government can basically march in, give you a crap check for your land, and tell you you've got to move because they need the land for themselves. The entire concept of private property has been totally ravaged by the federal government and a variety of the institutions they've created including the EPA. A lot of the time these lands are gobbled up by the government for irrational reasoning and to the benefit of big business. A strict adherence to property rights would give the people the power to fight back against polluters. Right now the business/government partnership has set up an environment where this is almost impossible to do.
Stay home and mind our own business. It's a pretty simple idea. We've spent the better part of 7 decades as the world's policemen so the idea is totally ingrained in American society that we need to stop every bad thing in the world from happening. The problem is more times than not we end up making the situation far worse for ourselves because there's consequences to our actions we can never understand at the time.
People always want a solution to how to stop corruption, how to stop the massive amount of money that flows to the top, how to stop the special interest domination and a congress that cares more about reelection than its oath. They always come up with new ideas or laws or restrictions on campaign finance or term limits or whatever... but while they identify all these symptoms and offer solutions to said symptoms they very seldom see the cause. The cause is much more simple than the symptoms.
The cause is that of unchecked power. All the power has been centralized to the federal government and this consolidation of power has made it easier for corporations to buy influence, laws, and restrictions to be implemented nation-wide to stamp out competition. The real issue we face is not the corruption but the environment that's been created for everything to be centralized at the top.
Men with power are inherently corrupt, we don't need to be geniuses to see this. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely- we've all heard this quote and we understand the powerful truth. Men are not perfect, men are corruptible, and the more power they've got the more likely it is they'll be tempted into greater corruption. This is true of all governments and of all men.
The real issue we face is not how do we stop corruption, the issue we face is how do we MANAGE the corruption that has always, and will always, exist in positions of power? And the simple solution is one that our founders tried to give us; decentralization of power and checks and balances at each level.
Once these principles are lost corruption and special influence runs rampant and the entire capitalist system is subverted for socialism and eventually fascism.
At the end of the day we face the problems we do today because most people are unwilling or unable to even have these conservations or understand the principles which this country was founded on.
Even those of you I disagree with are still a rare breed in this nation- how many people actually care? Not many... and that's why we're in the situation we're in. I contend most people do not care because they see no way they can make a difference which is why I see Jefferson's idea of America as the best- one that empowers the individual over the state, and one where districts can establish its sovereignty over states and states over the fed.
All attention and power is focused on the federal government instead and the individual is left with a feeling of powerlessness so we just go along for the ride and spend our lives working for paper money that depreciates every second of every day and go out every 4 years to vote for our King in the hopes it will make any kind of difference when it won't.
The real solution is to give people their power back so the corruption can be easier managed and stamped out at local and state levels- where real power would once again exist.
Last edited by whitesoxfan83; 11-22-2012 at 09:06 PM.
I know, right? Imagine that. Just been busy with work and family - doesn't give me a lot of time for play on the interwebz. Maybe I'll take a shot at this again for a bit.
Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т
Legal in all cases (minus late term) and all states. Personally, I believe it shouldn't be used as a form of birth control, but politically I am adamantly pro-choice and for a woman's right to choose.
I do not agree that there should be drug testing for welfare recipients. First of all, it's unconstitutional; it is an unreasonable search. It makes the assumption that all welfare recipients are drug users and need to be tested. Secondly, it's a massive waste of money. I believe the statistics (out of Florida) showed that welfare recipients were using illicit drugs at a rate less than the national average - but expenditure on drug testing combined with payouts was at rates higher than the state had ever seen before.
I am pro-regulation in the economy. Pure capitalism would lead to the ruin of capitalism, therefore, regulations protecting small businesses from behemoths like WalMart and Target are necessary. Financial regulations need to be strengthened so the canyon between the wealthy and the rest of America can be overcome.
Increase our energy independence, but not at the expense of the environment. No to Keystone; it's a job creator for Canada (only establishes around 700 permanent jobs in the US) and burning the oil found in the sands in Northern Canada would be like running your on a coal engine (in terms of CO2).
Establish more uniform standards between states on teacher education and student education. I'm a big fan behind the idea of the President's "Race to the Top" as opposed to NCLB. And, going back to a West Wing episode, I think putting people in classrooms as a way to pay off student loan debt is a great thing - the state in which they work pays them a living wage for two to four years of teaching in at-need communities. Community service as a means to an end and an option for people not interested in enlisting in the military.
Ideally, for me, I'd like us to be a single-payer nation. The likelihood of that is practically nil, though. As it stands, I believe Obamacare will be a good fix. There will still be things that need to be addressed that will present themselves as we go forward, but it's a good step toward cost control.
Campaign Finance Reform
Certainly needs to be addressed. I believe we just had our first $1 billion campaign (maybe 2008 was, regardless). We need to be much more strict on Super PACs and spending from special interest groups. We need to limit soft money brought in by campaigns.
There's a quick touch of issues. Sorry, really rough.
Когда́ де́ньги говоря́т, тогда́ пра́вда молчи́т
Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?
Legal up to the 20th week. At that point, IMO, the fetus has developed to a point whre it could survive outside the womb, and its right to exist should be respected. I would also encourage increased access to birth control, as well as public awareness to avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place. On a slight tangent, I would reinvigorate the adoption system in the US, mostly becasue no child should go without a loving home.
I have no issue with helping people who need help, and want to help themselves. I think the idea of welfare, in of itself though, is incomplete. There should be job skills training, interviewing, and assistance in finding employment. In return, I would ask participants to volunteer in a manner that they could. I would look to integrate existing organizations and systems, in public/ private partnerships to make this effort more cohesive. I believe there are aspects to the Habitat for Humanity project approach that could be applied to assistance. I would also look to limit the duration of assistance, and make giving back to the program for participants madatory. There should not be an issue for helping folks that both need and want it. And the benefit to adding productive participants into the economy would be a net benefit.
Focus national incentives to start and grow small businesses. Other than that, I don't feel well informed enough to present a viable plan.
Develop nuclear power to make energy utility affordable. Also invest heavily in alternative energies, including solar farms in the southwest, wind energy off our coasts in areas with sustainable wind patterns, and continue developing tidal and ocean current power generation. As Nate said, ethanol is a loser. I would also offer increased tax incentives to those who invest in alternative power generation at their homes. By subsidizing this effort, people would decrease the cost of living, decrease demand on publicly provided energy.
This being said, I would also continue to utilize cleaner coal, as well as oil to the greatest possible extent. The enemy we face now is cost, The oil industry, in its current form, is not streamlined for cost from either the private sector, or government perspectives. This must be addressed.
Lastly, I would look to improve transportation of goods within this country. Look for ways to decrease the cost per ton mile for the transportation of goods.
Yes. But the cost of education at every level has been allowed to run out of control. Education needs to be more accessible to all, more affordable. The value, IMO, for a college degree seems inflated by the current market. The education system needs a top to bottom overhaul. Teachers should be paid three times what they make now, with retention and promotion based exclusively on performance. I would also mandate budgeting/ financial management, and economics be included in the public education system. Art and music should not be optional for schools to offer.
Increase the himan intelligence capacity of the CIA in critical countries, including those in the middle east, central asia, southeast asia, central and south america, china, and russia. Yes, its spying, and no, I won't apologize for it. Technology is a valuable intelligence gathering and analysis tool, but it is not as critical as human assets. Homeland security, and national security as it were is another area I think needs a top to bottom overhaul. It has become too political. The FBI, CIA, NSA, and other entities need to be well lead, and they haven't been for over 30 years.
Repeal Obamacare immediately. Work with private industry to allow for accessible and affordable options for healthcare. Either this, or just go to a national single payer healthcare system, and kill insurance outright. But for the love of God, pick one. I prefer the former, byut a hybrid system is complicated, and solicits government waste, and ineffective care for people who need it.
As stated above, more nuclear energy. As for missles, how in the hell can we be short on nuclear missles?
Stem Cell Research
As stated above, implement a fair tax system.
Environmental regulation to reduce emissions, and eliminate ground and water contamination makes sense. But the EPA needs yet another complete overhaul. Some of their policies are, to put it nicely, retarded, and based soley on justifying their own existance and budget. **** that.
War is the result of a failure of civilization. Iraq was an epic embarrassment. I say this after having volunteered for one of my two deployments. My resentment toward the government officials who, at the time, pulled us into a needless and fraudulent war. While I am happy to ahve been a part of Sadaam's ouster, it pains me to see those responsible for Iraq have not seen justice.
I feel should reflect the integrity, strength, and compassion the United States is supposed to stand for.
This should not be a discussion. Either you support liberty and freedom or you don't. Anyone who opposes a person's ability to pursue their own happiness in this most basic way is an enemy of freedom, the Declaration of Independance, and Constitution, period.
Campaign Finance Reform
This is needed if we are to ever receive the representation we need. Someone just said this a few days ago, but I think perhaps the best method I have heard for this is to force candidates for political office to wear jackets while in public with the names of their donors patched on, just as in NASCAR.
Last edited by Patsfan56; 11-29-2012 at 09:30 PM. Reason: Added campaign Finance Reform Section
"I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time". So I ordered French Toast during the Renaissance."