Another court case headed to SCOTUS?...

e original copies."

welfare of the People, it says welfare of the united states. Not capitalise d.

Yes, the general welfare of the US. That means helping anyone and everyone as our government sees fit. While the term is not well defined, I think i t is clear enough to allow for providing aid to those in need. So this is not a Constitutional issue no matter how much you may not like the idea of public aid to the less fortunate.

Rick C.

LOL! You want me to ignore you, but you aren't capable of ignoring me? LOL!!!

Rick C.

democracy..."

Not according to Abe Foxman.

Numbers.

Ron Paul's numbers were very good. But the RNC snubbed him using their "methods". They lost the election.

Hillary Clinton pretty much bought the nomination, the DNC sold out. They lost the election.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Perhaps I need to explain it to you.

Think what you want to think, it doesn't make you right.

Seems you would be happier.

You may have read the words (I doubt it) but you _certainly_ don't understand what you read. "General welfare" Robinhood

Idiot!

Nor Yasser Arafat, in his day. So what? The facts speak for themselves. Open your eyes.

The lack thereof?

Bullshit. He was a nut. His son, somewhat less.

Certainly true but I don't know what that has to do with the price of rice.

ote:

d a lot written about it. "

ment operations, not charity. Read the Constitution.

n grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general W elfare of the United States."

the original copies.

ere anything in the quoted section you would like explained?

"Robinhood" is your language. The rest of the world feels it is appropriat e to spend government money to help people in need and to help them better their station. You seem to have some perverse view that if you don't like how the government spends it's money, that makes collecting taxes unconstit utional.

Rick C.

ind a lot written about it. "

rnment operations, not charity. Read the Constitution.

ion grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, a nd Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the United States."

f the original copies.

there anything in the quoted section you would like explained?

ate to spend government money to help people in need and to help them bette r their station. You seem to have some perverse view that if you don't lik e how the government spends it's money, that makes collecting taxes unconst itutional.

Krw is brain-dead. He seems to imagine that this give him some kind of myst ical insight into the intentions of the long-dead founding tax evaders.

James Arthur pretends to the same kind of mystical insight, but he merely m isrepresents what they did and why they did it to support his equally bizar re political opinions.

Neither of them has the sense to realise that a reasonable government inves ts in making the working class healthier, better educated and more producti ve. It doesn't pay off directly in a much higher tax take from them, but th e people who hire them do considerably better, and pay even more taxes (unl ess the likes of krw and James Arthur have fiddled with the tax system).

Nut or not he won the debates. The crowd was chanting "President Paul, Pres ident Paul...". Besides, Trump got elected. As much better he is than Hilla ry Clinton, he is much more of a nut. The only real thing I disagreed with Paul about was abortion. He was too dead set against it. Well, he was an ob stetrician and for that, such an attitude would be a qualification. If you' re pregnant that's what you want.

Rand Paul has been bought. His Father, no. I am sure they would have done to him what they did to Trafficant, who was innocent of the charges. And I have proof. But Ron Paul was so utterly squeaky clean and careful they coul dn't do shit. In fact Ron Paul got quite a bit of donations from outside hi s district, but since he was in the FEDERAL government there is nothing wro ng with that. Traffioant could almost have gotten elected in prison. He had been a sheriff and scrutinized foreclosure papers before evicting people r ather than rubber stamping them like most others.

Even at that, there was something wrong with him, like he was practically f amous for "And we have $ 100,000 to study the mating habits of the tsetse f ly, beam me up Scotty", BUT, tsetse flies have showed up in the US and they spread disease that kills cattle. I don't care that much about people anym ore but I like a good steak. I used to care but they are just too stupid, s o let Darwinism work.

Thee is something wrong with every politician. I don't know why. If it isn' t religion they can't do math. If they aren't warmongers they want to tell you what to eat. People don't vote FOR anyone, they vote AGAINST the other. The only place I can find that would be logical to lay the blame is the po litical parties.

This is not the rest of the world.

Obviously not, otherwise it wouldn't have been necessary to make the distinction.

Americans do like to think that they should do things differently because they are different from the rest of the world, with the implication that what they do is right for them, because they are different.

Mostly they are different because they do things wrong, and need to correct their errors and become more like the rest of the world - live longer, have lower child mortality, pay less per head for health care.

It's a long list.

No, this is the United States of Jurb....

Rick C.

That is in fact what it is. It is taking property from one person for the explicit purpose of giving to another.

Then let them spend their money. I'm all for it.

Wrong, moron. I'm against any anti-Constitutional collection and uses of that money. I don't care if 99% of the people want to do something that is against the Constitution. Change it first or it's meaningless.

Then why is the "rest of the world" (your words) relevant? Jeez, what a dope!

What color is the sky on your planet?

The "crowd" was chanting for Hillary, too. Does that prove something useful about Ron Paul?

Complete and utter bullshit.

More bullshit (though to be expected)

Perhaps because they're people?

Which you are perfectly happy with when the "other" is part of the defense system, the police, the courts or the like, or even when the "other" is going to build the roads you drive on.

Find another way of expressing your dislike of spending on education, health care and social security. The "taking property from one person for the explicit purpose of giving to another" formulation covers most of the business of government, and society would stop working if it didn't happen.

Even the US constitution is okay with spending tax money on improving "general welfare". Krw and James Arthur have a very odd view of what "general welfare" might mean - since their understanding of it seems to exclude the kind of welfare improved by spending on health care, education and social services.

ments.

is my

ericho,

will reimburse you for

ho fell

The Samaritan 1) helped a victim, 2) using his own money. Not someone who had entered his house without permission, who'd taken food meant for his family, and had already taken perhaps $100,000 in education money local citizens had collected for their own children.

I missed those parables where, apparently, Jesus held people up and demande d their money at sword point to finance his charitable works.

I only noticed that he taught we should be kind to and care for one another , sharing our own houses and from our own tables.

I missed where he taught that charity is a goodness we delegate to Caesar, to be done using other people's money--taken indiscriminately, by force--to benefit others, deserving or not.

Cheers, James Arthur