Healthcare

T. A. Gardner said:
No, governments are supposed to run their countries and deal with other countries. People living there should:

A. Take care of themselves and not rely on government to do that.
and
B. Take care of their neighbors and not rely on government to do that.
Click to expand...
Your notion of governance is completely elitist and fucked up, neocon globalist shithammer.
 
the peoples money is to be given to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, belllingcat and Rothschild and the Pope.

fuck the people.

right neocon fuckhammers as a class?

yes I'm talking to you.
 
Litmus said:
promoting the general welfare.
Click to expand...

Okay, so doing stuff that benefits everyone like roads or a postal service hum? Wouldn't limiting taxation to a low minimum be a way to promote the general welfare by letting people keep more of what they earn?
Litmus said:
not creating money for rich people and slapping it on the debt of all people.
Click to expand...

How exactly does a government do that? Oligarchies and dictatorships seem to be the primary ones doing that sort of thing, you know, like Leftist Socialist governments do.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Okay, so doing stuff that benefits everyone like roads or a postal service hum? Wouldn't limiting taxation to a low minimum be a way to promote the general welfare by letting people keep more of what they earn?


How exactly does a government do that? Oligarchies and dictatorships seem to be the primary ones doing that sort of thing, you know, like Leftist Socialist governments do.
Click to expand...
is bailing out banks a proper function?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Okay, so doing stuff that benefits everyone like roads or a postal service hum? Wouldn't limiting taxation to a low minimum be a way to promote the general welfare by letting people keep more of what they earn?


How exactly does a government do that? Oligarchies and dictatorships seem to be the primary ones doing that sort of thing, you know, like Leftist Socialist governments do.
Click to expand...
I'm for low taxes.

tariffs.

tariffs protect workers and domestic industries and life in general in a country.

I know you secret never trumper neocon fucksticks actually hate tariffs..

so fuck off then.
 
Litmus said:
ok then.

general welfare is constitutionally valid.

of course we can debate what general welfare is..

you wanna?
Click to expand...
No, "general welfare" is not constitutionally valid. That phrase only appears in the preamble. There is no specific part of the constitution requiring it as a legal thing.
 
Litmus said:
I'm for low taxes.

tariffs.
Click to expand...

Tariffs aren't taxes. That's why they're called tariffs.

As for banks... The banking system is part and parcel of the government. Sure, banks are a private institution, but because the control a good portion of the money supply as well as handle many transactions between members of society and business, they have a function that government has an interest in maintaining in a reliable state. If a bank gets into financial trouble, the government should handle it as a case of criminal neglect by the bank's officers (a crime), while ensuring that those with accounts get covered and remain stable. That is, a "bailout" isn't a free lunch.


Litmus said:
tariffs protect workers and domestic industries and life in general in a country.
Click to expand...

Tariffs are a means to regulate international trade, nothing more.
Litmus said:
I know you secret never trumper neocon fucksticks actually hate tariffs..
Click to expand...

Okay, whoever they are.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Tariffs aren't taxes. That's why they're called tariffs.

As for banks... The banking system is part and parcel of the government. Sure, banks are a private institution, but because the control a good portion of the money supply as well as handle many transactions between members of society and business, they have a function that government has an interest in maintaining in a reliable state. If a bank gets into financial trouble, the government should handle it as a case of criminal neglect by the bank's officers (a crime), while ensuring that those with accounts get covered and remain stable. That is, a "bailout" isn't a free lunch.




Tariffs are a means to regulate international trade, nothing more.


Okay, whoever they are.
Click to expand...
tariffs was the answer to the second part of the question.

sorry if I was too minimalist in my expression.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Tariffs aren't taxes. That's why they're called tariffs.

As for banks... The banking system is part and parcel of the government. Sure, banks are a private institution, but because the control a good portion of the money supply as well as handle many transactions between members of society and business, they have a function that government has an interest in maintaining in a reliable state. If a bank gets into financial trouble, the government should handle it as a case of criminal neglect by the bank's officers (a crime), while ensuring that those with accounts get covered and remain stable. That is, a "bailout" isn't a free lunch.




Tariffs are a means to regulate international trade, nothing more.


Okay, whoever they are.
Click to expand...
god damn i just read the rest of this.

this is banker cocksucker bullshit.

you're fucking lost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top