Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 153

Thread: Federal Politics

  1. #1
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Federal Politics

    Federal politics thread. Feel free to let the discussion flow in whatever manner the conversation takes us. I'll start with a question I posed to Slashy in the Romney thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Point #1 "changing things" isn't the same as "fixing things". They "change things" all the time. You tell me when the last time was that the government successfully "fixed" anything.

    Point #2 "less government" isn't the same thing as "no government". You're arguing against a position I haven't taken.

    Less government is absolutely critical; it's the only way out of this mess. Going for a half- measure like trying to prove that Republicans can guide this bloated mess any better than Democrats is political suicide.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seven
    So where would you cut government? In what specific areas do you cut back in order to make the government smaller?
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  2. #2
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    My answer is I would take a fire axe to the Federal government, slashing all functions that are not expressly delegated to it by the Constitution. The reasons / justifications would take several entire books of text to fully discuss, but that's what I would do.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  3. #3
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    My answer is I would take a fire axe to the Federal government, slashing all functions that are not expressly delegated to it by the Constitution. The reasons / justifications would take several entire books of text to fully discuss, but that's what I would do.
    That's about what I expected. No detail, no answers. It's hard to take a proposal like that seriously and that's why Libertarians aren't taken seriously. Similarly to liberals, their ideas are great in theory, but not practical. But at least liberals can sometimes define what they believe beyond painfully general statements.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  4. #4
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    That's about what I expected. No detail, no answers. It's hard to take a proposal like that seriously and that's why Libertarians aren't taken seriously. Similarly to liberals, their ideas are great in theory, but not practical. But at least liberals can sometimes define what they believe beyond painfully general statements.
    That's not much of a counter- argument, but if you prefer liberalism to libertarianism, I can't honestly say I'm surprised. That seems to be rampant around these parts.
    I provided you with a very specific answer; "every function that is not expressly delegated by the Constitution". If you require more details, just let me know what details you need.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  5. #5
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Look at the federal budget. Almost half of it goes to healthcare and defense. I'm not in favor of cutting defense funding, but that's a personal opinion and the military could get by with some cuts. But I would be more in favor of reallocating those funds to increase pay for soldiers. Healthcare. Healthcare is a mess. We spend more money on it than we get out of it and Obamacare is only going to make that worse. Healthcare needs major reform. I don't know that I would cut funding there, but again, we need to use it in a smarter way (and yes, I believe Romney had a smarter way). Government pensions. Way too much is spent on pensions in this country. Major cuts could made in that area. And then the beast of them all - welfare. Welfare needs major reform and cuts. It needs to be harder to get on, harder to stay on, and funding in that area should go way down in general. I have a number of ideas as far as how to reform welfare, admittedly unpolished, but I think we can it in a much better way. Most of the rest is infrastructure. I think it's too broad a subject to comment on accurately, but I imagine much like the other areas, most of the money is needed to but needs better direction. So to me, fiscally, I don't see where you are going to make major spending cuts outside of government pay and welfare. Government pay/pensions aren't going to go anywhere, well, because they are largely controlled by those who receive them. Which leads to your idea that something major needs to change in our government. But what element is that? What fundamentals do you change that allows for smaller government and less spending? Simply saying that it needs to happen, without offering any kind of answers, is silly. And it's exactly what the politicians we criticize do. So let's be better than that and try to figure this out without generalizations that don't get us anywhere. To me, I don't see where we can make the kind of cuts you are talking about, without infringing on the constitution. A lot of money is wasted in government, but it's money that we should spend in the areas that it is already invested in, just more effectively. But I don't know how you fix that.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  6. #6
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Look at the federal budget. Almost half of it goes to healthcare and defense. I'm not in favor of cutting defense funding, but that's a personal opinion and the military could get by with some cuts. But I would be more in favor of reallocating those funds to increase pay for soldiers. Healthcare. Healthcare is a mess. We spend more money on it than we get out of it and Obamacare is only going to make that worse. Healthcare needs major reform. I don't know that I would cut funding there, but again, we need to use it in a smarter way (and yes, I believe Romney had a smarter way). Government pensions. Way too much is spent on pensions in this country. Major cuts could made in that area. And then the beast of them all - welfare. Welfare needs major reform and cuts. It needs to be harder to get on, harder to stay on, and funding in that area should go way down in general. I have a number of ideas as far as how to reform welfare, admittedly unpolished, but I think we can it in a much better way. Most of the rest is infrastructure. I think it's too broad a subject to comment on accurately, but I imagine much like the other areas, most of the money is needed to but needs better direction. So to me, fiscally, I don't see where you are going to make major spending cuts outside of government pay and welfare. Government pay/pensions aren't going to go anywhere, well, because they are largely controlled by those who receive them. Which leads to your idea that something major needs to change in our government. But what element is that? What fundamentals do you change that allows for smaller government and less spending? Simply saying that it needs to happen, without offering any kind of answers, is silly. And it's exactly what the politicians we criticize do. So let's be better than that and try to figure this out without generalizations that don't get us anywhere. To me, I don't see where we can make the kind of cuts you are talking about, without infringing on the constitution. A lot of money is wasted in government, but it's money that we should spend in the areas that it is already invested in, just more effectively. But I don't know how you fix that.
    You seem to have a lot of ideas for somebody who freely admits that you don't know how you'd accomplish any of it. Especially since that seems to be your major objection. I have a very direct and simple plan for how I'd accomplish what I'd do: Don't allocate the funding.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  7. #7
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    You seem to have a lot of ideas for somebody who freely admits that you don't know how you'd accomplish any of it. Especially since that seems to be your major objection. I have a very direct and simple plan for how I'd accomplish what I'd do: Don't allocate the funding.
    And how does that work? What happens to infrastructure? Do private corporations fix the roads just out of the goodness of their hearts? And what about citizens who genuinely cannot work and need help living on their own? Are they supposed to mooch off of their families for their entire lives? Go ahead and call me a liberal, but simply taking funds away from areas where we need government spending creates more problems than it fixes.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  8. #8
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    And how does that work? What happens to infrastructure? Do private corporations fix the roads just out of the goodness of their hearts? And what about citizens who genuinely cannot work and need help living on their own? Are they supposed to mooch off of their families for their entire lives? Go ahead and call me a liberal, but simply taking funds away from areas where we need government spending creates more problems than it fixes.
    Judging from your response here, I think I will just "go ahead and call you a liberal". You seriously think that we can't get by without the Federal government to "fix the roads" and "provide for those who cannot provide for themselves"? That must be an East coast thing.
    Your disagreement with the liberals is not over ideology, but of execution. That makes you much more like them than actual conservatives.
    The Federal government doesn't exist to provide for you like it's your mommy. It exists to protect your freedom and protect your ability to provide for yourself.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  9. #9
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Judging from your response here, I think I will just "go ahead and call you a liberal". You seriously think that we can't get by without the Federal government to "fix the roads" and "provide for those who cannot provide for themselves"? That must be an East coast thing.
    Your disagreement with the liberals is not over ideology, but of execution. That makes you much more like them than actual conservatives.
    Call me whatever you want. But tell me exactly how we get by without a governing force. Who fixes the roads and who provides for those who cannot provide for themselves. Go ahead and tell me.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  10. #10
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    I have already called you what I want (or rather what I think you are), and you haven't disputed it. I also notice that you haven't made any distinction between "governing force" and "benevolent collectivism", which is pretty much socialism.
    You, Sir, need to sit down and give some serious thought about what the proper role of government is, 'cuz from what I see here, it doesn't fit under any definition of "conservatism" I've ever heard of.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  11. #11
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    I have already called you what I want (or rather what I think you are), and you haven't disputed it. I also notice that you haven't made any distinction between "governing force" and "benevolent collectivism", which is pretty much socialism.
    You, Sir, need to sit down and give some serious thought about what the proper role of government is, 'cuz from what I see here, it doesn't fit under any definition of "conservatism" I've ever heard of.
    Didn't answer my question. No surprise.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  12. #12
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Didn't answer my question. No surprise.
    Likewise.
    Reading through your posts in this thread, all I'm seeing is attacks on conservatism and defenses of liberalism on your part. I think you should ponder that fact.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  13. #13
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Likewise.
    Reading through your posts in this thread, all I'm seeing is attacks on conservatism and defenses of liberalism on your part. I think you should ponder that fact.
    Why can't you stick to the discussion? When pressed for specifics on your ideas, you start hurling unprovoked insults.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  14. #14
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Why can't you stick to the discussion? When pressed for specifics on your ideas, you start hurling unprovoked insults.
    Nothing I've said here is intended as an insult. It's merely an objective statement of fact.
    Your whole argument is that the basic precepts of conservatism "can't work", you're defending the Federal government doing things it's not authorized to do, and giving well- meaning slogans about how beneficial it is to have a big Federal government to provide for us. That's what liberalism *is*.
    I'm trying to point out how self- conflicted your approach is, and inviting you to figure out where your ideology actually lies.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  15. #15
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Nothing I've said here is intended as an insult. It's merely an objective statement of fact.
    Your whole argument is that the basic precepts of conservatism "can't work", you're defending the Federal government doing things it's not authorized to do, and giving well- meaning slogans about how beneficial it is to have a big Federal government to provide for us. That's what liberalism *is*.
    I'm trying to point out how self- conflicted your approach is, and inviting you to figure out where your ideology actually lies.
    All I asked is if you don't believe in the federal government allocating funds, then who fixes the roads and provides for those with disabilities? If you can't answer the question it's fine.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  16. #16
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    ^ Hell, I'm even willing to help you sort it out. It seems to me that you want all the advantages of a big, benevolent government but without all the disadvantages that come with it. That's not conservatism.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The State and Local governments fix the roads, and the States provide for those with disabilities. Just as they have always done.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  17. #17
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    ^ Hell, I'm even willing to help you sort it out. It seems to me that you want all the advantages of a big, benevolent government but without all the disadvantages that come with it. That's not conservatism.
    Answer my question and then we can label me, if that's really the discussion you're interested in having here.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    ^ Hell, I'm even willing to help you sort it out. It seems to me that you want all the advantages of a big, benevolent government but without all the disadvantages that come with it. That's not conservatism.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The State and Local governments fix the roads, and the States provide for those with disabilities. Just as they have always done.
    So you're saying state governments can survive on their own without help from allocated federal funds? I'd have to disagree there with the possible exception of Texas.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  18. #18
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    So you're saying state governments can survive on their own without help from allocated federal funds? I'd have to disagree there with the possible exception of Texas.
    What do you think "United States" means? The several States can collect and allocate funding every bit as efficiently as a single, monolithic Federal government, can't they?
    How did this addled liberal thinking ever manage to infiltrate the Republican Party?
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  19. #19
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    What do you think "United States" means? The several States can collect and allocate funding every bit as efficiently as a single, monolithic Federal government, can't they?
    How did this addled liberal thinking ever manage to infiltrate the Republican Party?
    Interesting. So the hundreds of billions of dollars that the federal government gives to state governments every single year goes to what exactly? Because I know for a fact the state of Pennsylvania receives billions in grants from D.C. for infrastructure that the state couldn't afford to pay for otherwise.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  20. #20
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Interesting. So the hundreds of billions of dollars that the federal government gives to state governments every single year goes to what exactly? Because I know for a fact the state of Pennsylvania receives billions in grants from D.C. for infrastructure that the state couldn't afford to pay for otherwise.
    And where did all that money come from, if not the residents of the very same States that they got it from in the first place?
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  21. #21
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    And where did all that money come from, if not the residents of the very same States that they got it from in the first place?
    Again, your idea is great in theory, but not practice. State A. requires $700 billion in federal money to maintain living conditions, while state B. only needs $12 billion. State B is doing just fine, probably making a profit, thriving - but do we just condemn state A because they can't afford to pay for anything they need? "United States" not "Individual States". Smaller government is great, but to operate under this pretense that a federal body isn't needed whatsoever is beyond naīve.

    - - - Updated - - -

    We need to put the decision making in the hands of state and local government, but expecting them to pay for everything alone is unrealistic.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  22. #22
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Again, your idea is great in theory, but not practice. State A. requires $700 billion in federal money to maintain living conditions, while state B. only needs $12 billion. State B is doing just fine, probably making a profit, thriving - but do we just condemn state A because they can't afford to pay for anything they need? "United States" not "Individual States". Smaller government is great, but to operate under this pretense that a federal body isn't needed whatsoever is beyond naīve.
    Yay for collectivism!
    /A Federal body *is* needed and I never said otherwise
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  23. #23
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Yay for collectivism!
    /A Federal body *is* needed and I never said otherwise
    You've already said you wouldn't allocate federal funds.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  24. #24
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    You've already said you wouldn't allocate federal funds.
    To any activity that isn't expressly delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution.
    / "conservatives" understand that
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  25. #25
    Quest For Seven Array title="Mach1 has a reputation beyond repute"> Mach1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Gender
    Posts
    5,161

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    ^ Hell, I'm even willing to help you sort it out. It seems to me that you want all the advantages of a big, benevolent government but without all the disadvantages that come with it. That's not conservatism.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The State and Local governments fix the roads, and the States provide for those with disabilities. Just as they have always done.
    That will never work and does not work now. States with small populations(less tax revenue) would be crushed by the cost. And where do you think the states get their money to provide for those with disabilities or the elderly now?

    This is where a flat tax would work.


    Give a lib a fish--he eats for a day

    Teach a lib to fish--he is back the next day asking for more free fish.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  26. #26
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    To any activity that isn't expressly delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution.
    / "conservatives" understand that
    Is providing funds for state needs expressly delegated by the constitution? I've only read the document once but I don't believe that was defined.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach1 View Post
    That will never work and does not work now. States with small populations(less tax revenue) would be crushed by the cost. And where do you think the states get their money to provide for those with disabilities or the elderly now?

    This is where a flat tax would work.
    Good post. This thread has turned into a living definition of what is wrong with Libertarian ideals. And the Libertarian is doing most of the convincing of that.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  27. #27
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Federal Politics

    Umm... it had always worked just fine up to the point where the Feds took it over and used it as a bludgeon to exercise control over the States.
    But yeah... "Conservatism doesn't work". Whatever. Be who you are and quit pretending to be something you're not.
    /It's 1:00 and I have to get up in the morning to support the collective...
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  28. #28
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    And that folks, is how you disarm a naīve Libertarian who will not answer direct questions because fact of the matter is, he cannot
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  29. #29
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Federal Politics

    Just to recap...


    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    My answer is I would take a fire axe to the Federal government

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    simple plan for how I'd accomplish what I'd do: Don't allocate the funding

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    The State and Local governments fix the roads

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    The several States can collect and allocate funding every bit as efficiently as a single, monolithic Federal government

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    You seriously think that we can't get by without the Federal government

    But wait!


    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27
    A Federal body *is* needed and I never said otherwise

    Night night, Dawg. Errr I mean Slash.


    Libertarians have some good ideas. But they have been hijacked by conservative extremists like Slash. And it's hard for me to use that term, as it has been overused by liberals so often. But you can't simply severe all ties state and local governments have to a federal body and expect it to work. It isn't realistic. What we need to do, is give decision making back to state and local governments but continue to help fund those bodies with federal money.
    "If you are holding on to something that you no longer need to hold on to, I encourage you to let go." - Rashard Mendenhall

  30. #30

    Re: Federal Politics

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Libertarians have some good ideas. But they have been hijacked by conservative extremists like Slash. And it's hard for me to use that term, as it has been overused by liberals so often. But you can't simply severe all ties state and local governments have to a federal body and expect it to work. It isn't realistic. What we need to do, is give decision making back to state and local governments but continue to help fund those bodies with federal money.
    I'm most definitely a libertarian, and a conservative one at that. The problem however, is that there often isn't any balance associated with political positions. It's all zero-sum games. Yet, on the other hand, when you say, "continue to help fund those bodies with federal money," you also hand control right back to the federal government, and it also betrays a deeper level of thinking that I am very much in disagreement with.

    There is no such thing as "federal money," only "my money" and "your money" that the federal government takes and then hands back out, and a good portion of it is done for political favors. Yes, I do believe that there needs to be a federal collection of money to raise and keep a standing army, to help facility commerce between the states and abroad, and to assure justice (personal liberties trump state's rights, which trump federal IMO, which is why I believe the federal government was right to step in and end segregation. It wasn't a state's rights issue, it was a personal rights issue). But those things need to be done on a large, pre-planned scale that delimits the amount of manipulation a small group of politicians can have over it.

    In truth, there is nothing wrong with Libertarian ideals. Each and every person has the right by God or Nature (however you want to put it), to make of him or her self whatever they choose, and the least amount of shackles placed on that person, is the most moral government to govern that person, and that, is a libertarian government.

    The issues here is, how can we get Libertarian ideals to play out in the real world without ending up in anarchy or retreating to a statist position.


Posting Permissions

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