Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: Economics Plutocracy

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice in Liberaland View Post
    Your premise as always is flawed. Not all written laws go to the Supreme Court for review. In fact that was never the intent of the Supreme Court. They were never intended to rule on the Constitutionality of laws. It was assume that the Congress would abide by the Constitution.
    Of course they don't, but your counter point is irrelevant.
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." Dwight D. Eisenhower

    "How Citizens United changed politics, in 7 charts"

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-in-6-charts/

    "Free markets do not create the conditions for free markets." Brandon Emrys

    A bit off topic but interesting.

    "In the Golden Age between the end of the Second World War and 1973, people in what was then known as the ‘industrialised world’ – Western Europe, North America, and Japan – saw their living standards improve year after year. They looked forward to even greater prosperity for their children. Culturally, the first half of the Golden Age was a time of conformity, dominated by hard work to recover from the disaster of the war. The second half of the age was culturally very different, marked by protest and artistic and political experimentation. Behind that fermentation lay the confidence of people raised in a white-hot economy: if their adventures turned out badly, they knew, they could still find a job." https://aeon.co/essays/how-economic-...came-to-an-end

    "A final word on politics. As in economics nothing is certain save the certainty that there will be firm prediction by those who do not know. It is possible that in some election, near or far, a presidential candidate will emerge in the United States determined to draw into the campaign those not now impelled to vote. Conceivably those so attracted - those who are not threatened by higher taxes and who are encouraged by the vision of a new governing community committed to the rescue of the cities and the impacted underclass - could outnumber those lost because of the resulting invasion of contentment. If this happens the effort would succeed." John Kenneth Galbraith 'The Culture of Contentment'
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    11,390
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 4,028 Times in 3,012 Posts
    Groans
    398
    Groaned 234 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    Of course they don't, but your counter point is irrelevant.

    If the Founders had intended for the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter on the US Constitution, they would have written it into the document. That the Supreme Court had to interpret that little bit of a power grab through Marbury v Madison is hardly irrelevant.

    It is unmistakable that the US Constitution was written to limit the power of the federal government not expand it

  4. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice in Liberaland View Post
    If the Founders had intended for the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter on the US Constitution, they would have written it into the document. That the Supreme Court had to interpret that little bit of a power grab through Marbury v Madison is hardly irrelevant.

    It is unmistakable that the US Constitution was written to limit the power of the federal government not expand it
    Then why is the SCOTUS the final arbiter of law? And most historians think the separation of powers was the limiter. It is the structure and not a paper that makes it work.

    Saw there was a book on a quote I use often.

    "The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts." http://www.quotedb.com/speeches/wash...rewell-address


    https://www.amazon.com/Washingtons-F...=books&ie=UTF8
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  5. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    11,390
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 4,028 Times in 3,012 Posts
    Groans
    398
    Groaned 234 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    Then why is the SCOTUS the final arbiter of law? And most historians think the separation of powers was the limiter. It is the structure and not a paper that makes it work.

    Saw there was a book on a quote I use often.

    "The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts." http://www.quotedb.com/speeches/wash...rewell-address


    https://www.amazon.com/Washingtons-F...=books&ie=UTF8
    I think I just explained it to you. The Supreme Court gave itself that power through Marbury v Madison. It wasn't written in the text of the Constitution. If it was, then Marbury would not have been necessary. The other two branches didn't keep the Court in check

    You fancy yourself as this intellectual but you really aren't smart. Copying and pasting quotes from obscure books may sell at your Resistance meetings but I see right through it

  6. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice in Liberaland View Post
    I think I just explained it to you. The Supreme Court gave itself that power through Marbury v Madison. It wasn't written in the text of the Constitution. If it was, then Marbury would not have been necessary. The other two branches didn't keep the Court in check

    You fancy yourself as this intellectual but you really aren't smart. Copying and pasting quotes from obscure books may sell at your Resistance meetings but I see right through it
    Signs of a stupid person is their use of ad hominem and their censoring of people who challenge their ignorance. Article III of the Constitution grants the court its power. The Constitution is a living document, history shows that clearly. PS our first president is not an obscure figure.

    "Article III of the Constitution establishes and empowers the judicial branch of the national government. The very first sentence of Article III says: “The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”


    "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." Soren Kierkegaard
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  7. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    11,390
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 4,028 Times in 3,012 Posts
    Groans
    398
    Groaned 234 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    Signs of a stupid person is their use of ad hominem and their censoring of people who challenge their ignorance. Article III of the Constitution grants the court its power. The Constitution is a living document, history shows that clearly. PS our first president is not an obscure figure.

    "Article III of the Constitution establishes and empowers the judicial branch of the national government. The very first sentence of Article III says: “The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”


    "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." Soren Kierkegaard
    Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true. I have no ability to censor you, but if it make you feel like a martyr to claim it, who am I to stop you.

    No the Constitution is not a "living document". That is only claimed by people who don't like that it is a document of negative rights

    Nothing in the US Constitution as originally written enshrines the Judiciary with interpreting the Constitution. In fact the Founders had as its goal for the Judiciary to be the weakest branch. The intent was for the legislative branch to be the strongest branch.

    The "power" to interpret the Constitution was granted to the Supreme Court BY the Supreme Court.

  8. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice in Liberaland View Post
    ....No the Constitution is not a "living document". That is only claimed by people who don't like that it is a document of negative rights

    Nothing in the US Constitution as originally written enshrines the Judiciary with interpreting the Constitution. In fact the Founders had as its goal for the Judiciary to be the weakest branch. The intent was for the legislative branch to be the strongest branch.

    The "power" to interpret the Constitution was granted to the Supreme Court BY the Supreme Court.
    You are getting off track, the Constitution covers it in Article III, no interpretation necessary. Since the scotus already had the authority, no interpretation was necessary. And you do realize there is an amendment process? Living it is. You already lost this argument as life moves on and the court decides the law of the land. You can whine forever ain't gonna change a thing.

    "Conservatives’ vulnerability to accepting untruths didn’t apply equally to all false claims: When lies suggested dangerous or apocalyptic outcomes, more conservative participants were more likely to believe them than when the lie suggested a possible benefit."

    http://www.latimes.com/science/scien...202-story.html

    "Conservatives thrive on a world filled with mysterious evil and unfathomable hatreds, where good is always on the defensive and time is a precious commodity in the cosmic race against corruption and decline." Corey Robin 'The Reactionary Mind'
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  9. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    11,390
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 4,028 Times in 3,012 Posts
    Groans
    398
    Groaned 234 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    You are getting off track, the Constitution covers it in Article III, no interpretation necessary. Since the scotus already had the authority, no interpretation was necessary. And you do realize there is an amendment process? Living it is. You already lost this argument as life moves on and the court decides the law of the land. You can whine forever ain't gonna change a thing.

    "Conservatives’ vulnerability to accepting untruths didn’t apply equally to all false claims: When lies suggested dangerous or apocalyptic outcomes, more conservative participants were more likely to believe them than when the lie suggested a possible benefit."

    http://www.latimes.com/science/scien...202-story.html

    "Conservatives thrive on a world filled with mysterious evil and unfathomable hatreds, where good is always on the defensive and time is a precious commodity in the cosmic race against corruption and decline." Corey Robin 'The Reactionary Mind'

    The Constitution did not expressly give the power to the Court. It is an implied power. Having an Amendment process isn't what people refer to when they call the Constitution a living document and you know it. You are trying to be coy.

    If that were true then there would have been and Amendment for Roe v Wade. You know that hidden right to privacy in the Constitution that was never found before?

    But, since you maintain that the Court "decides the law of the land" then you should 100% accept Citizens United and never complain about it right? Democrats should never try to overturn it because it is THE LAW OF THE LAND. Right?

  10. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice in Liberaland View Post
    The Constitution did not expressly give the power to the Court. It is an implied power. Having an Amendment process isn't what people refer to when they call the Constitution a living document and you know it. You are trying to be coy.

    If that were true then there would have been and Amendment for Roe v Wade. You know that hidden right to privacy in the Constitution that was never found before?

    But, since you maintain that the Court "decides the law of the land" then you should 100% accept Citizens United and never complain about it right? Democrats should never try to overturn it because it is THE LAW OF THE LAND. Right?
    See this is the problem with righties, subtlety eludes you. These are people not gods. Consider only a quote below from another book I have read lol. Try to get your head around other stupid Scotus decisions. Sometimes intelligent rational men and women wear those robes sometimes fools wear them. Thomas and Alito are two current fools. Right now Trump is selecting a bunch of wacko-doodles as judges so beware. lol Check these idiots out: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...transform.html

    And read and learn.

    "It was the Bill of Rights itself, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, which made slavery legal in the Dred Scott case of 1857. That same Bill of Rights negated the results of the Civil War by making de facto slavery legal in the form of Segregation thanks to the Court's decision on Plessy v. Ferguson, in 1896. Indeed, that same Bill of Rights ended de facto slavery with the Brown v. School Board decision in 1954, only after great internal debate among the judges. In 1905 the Court approved the exploitation of workers, women, children and immigrants, thanks to Lochner v. New York. It continues to find women unequal to men, in such cases as Bradwell v. Illinois or Hoyt v. Florida. In Korematsu. v. U.S.A. it also approved the removal by the Executive of the constitutional rights of the American Japanese after Pearl Harbor.

    This is not to say that legislatures are incapable of acting badly: Over the question of Japanese rights in 1941, the parliaments of both Britain and Canada were guilty in the same way as the American Supreme Court of racism combined with financial opportunism - that is to say, the removal of rights, internment and forced disposition of property. The point is, however. that the Bill of Rights gave no extra protection, nor did the wisdom of the judges.

    Still more important, these policy questions central to morality and humanism, central to the very nature of the citizen, were decided by an appointed body, The elected representatives thus escaped all responsibility for decisions which were essential to the moral and physical well-being of their electors. Worse still, so did the citizen." p326 John Ralston Saul, 'Voltaire's Bastards'
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

Similar Threads

  1. Lies of Plutocracy: Exploding Five Myths that Dehumanize the Poor
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-27-2012, 08:58 PM
  2. Crackhead Economics
    By poet in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-31-2011, 05:31 AM
  3. For you who know a bit about economics...
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08-05-2011, 06:10 PM
  4. Barstool economics
    By SmarterthanYou in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 12-21-2009, 12:56 AM
  5. Who Knows More About Economics?
    By Minister of Truth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-14-2008, 01:33 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •